| a ot tle Gheologicns Sinn eee | ; 


Min 
PRINCETON, N. J. ty 


ez 4 Vist Hl ae 


BT 1101 .H64 1833 ) 
Hopkins, John Henry, 1792- | 


1868. 
Christianity vindicated, 
Shelf ; 
seven discourses on the 


Ss Seana Ls 
pe ee tee 
ye eine 
ER 


aan 
Pe 
As 


|  CHRISTIA NITY VINDICATED, 


vo 


SEVEN lala, = ag Le 


*, x 
1 aes) 


ERNAL EVIDENCES 


i) 
Va 


e he 


ay 


NEW TESTAMENT, 


& ; il im ‘ 
: ¥ 


WITH A CONCLUDING. DISSERTATION. 


ge io py a 


BY. JOHN HENRY “HOPKINS, 1 D. D. 


; Bishop of the Provestant Episcopal Church in the. Diocese of Vermont. 


Ne oO deyos, x orb maons "amodogns * la& cor. “ote Xovotos * In- 
gy iter Gus 10 xdoMOP tugeratots TOO. 


Ce ee 1 Tim. 1: 15. 


¥} aie 


sa “BURLINGTON: 
. SMITH. vl 


Ye d i 


1 . 4 
, ‘ 
a w 
' 
7 + 
: b 
Pee , 
Enrerep according to Act oe seo 
GoopricH, in the C Clerks office . the Dist n ct 
‘ By it 4 ih a we 
} Mipes Ce ara 7 
4 
F 
it 
| a4 
a 5 


YO THER 


' } 


«RIGHT REVEREND WILLIAM WHITE, D. D. 
> Se ha +? 


. : 
. * Bivhos of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Pennsylvania, 
62 . 
‘ ‘a din : ‘ 
4 
ub as Ry a a “ot i 
4 PHIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED, 
i a 


+ 


aes . , a. a, r gas } } ~ , 
_AS A SLIGHT TRIBUTE OF THE HIGH REGARD, 


CHERISHED BY THE AUTHOR 


¢ 


e\ 


_ through many years, 


‘THE EMINENT WISDOM, CHRISTIAN MODERATION, AND 


‘ » j A Re 
hl a 


ty "* y Hi te , 

PURE CONSISTENCY OF HIS PERSONAL AND 
% Y as ‘ 

a Ve f 


* al 


ne OFFICIAL CHARACTER. 


& we 4 yt ay ‘ r ie 
i ‘ ie ef; : ; Pay dc 
} ms " ii 7 b # 
Reg ae ky ee Om 
ee ae 
i hy ry he 
; » aes the aii mene 
iM y au * a, 
5 ae 


eee 7 eee 
Stee ae 


PREFACE. 


The first six of the following discourses, together 
with a series of sermons on the Apostles’ Creed, 


were composed several years ago in the ordinary 


course of parochial duty, and preached to the congre- 
gation of the Episcopal. Church at Pittsburgh, with 


be which the author was happily connected during the 
greater part of his ministerial life. They were subse- 
] “quently delivered in Trinity Church, Boston, and, by 
_ special request, in St. Paul’s Church of the same city. 
aan strong desire that they should be published, was 


kindly expressed to the author by the leading members 
of the two first mentioned Churches, some of whom 
have since departed, as he trusts, to the Christian’s 
rest: but the vestry of St. Paul’s were pleased to 


manifest their wishes by a regular request, communi- 
 eated to the author by their Secretary, in a form which 
~ not only demanded his grateful acknowledgments, but 
_ also called for his most serious. consideration. Pre- 
: ce: to his forming any conclusion, his removal to 


Os 44 


vi PREFACE. 


Burlington, in consequence of his appointment to the 
Episcopal office, furnished an opportunity to repeat 
the discourses again. The result was.a promise to 
his friends that he would publish them as soon as 
practicable, and this promise he now fulfils in part, by 
the present volume, which contains the six discourses 
on the external evidences of Christianity, with a 
seventh on the objections of infidelity, since composed. 
He has likewise added a Dissertation, designed to 
present, ina connected form, some proofs and illustra- 
tions belonging to the subject, which might, and per- 
haps would have been greatly extended, had not the 
pressure of other avocations, and the limits assigned 
to the volume, obliged him to hasten to a conclusion. 
In justice to himself, the author would only add, that 
his calculations on the success of his book are not 
such as can lead to any serious disappointment. The 
external evidences of Christianity have been admira- 
bly handled in several well-known and deservedly pop- 
ular works which have issued from the English press ; 
and two very able treatises have lately been contribu- 
ted tothe same department in our own country, by Dr. 
Alexander, and Bishop Me’ Ilvaine, besides the volume © 
published many years ago by Dr. Priestly. The apolo- 
ey of the author for adding another to the list, is the 


common, though not less true reliance, which allmen 


are so prone to place upon the judgment of their friends. 
Should that judgment be verified by the event, in 
the present instance, he will rejoice; for no one can 


PREFACE. Vu 


estimate more highly the privilege ae adding a good 
book to the stock of religious literature. But should 
the result be otherwise, he will not repine; because 
he is well aware that the power to effect much, in the 
walks of sacred composition, is given to few; and 
he will have duties enough remaining in the circle of 
his anxious stewardship, even if it should prove that 
he is not ealled to win an author’s triumphs, or to. 
share an author’s cares. 
Bu ington Vt. July 25, 1833. 


COR EN Ts. 


DISCOURSE I. 


Condition of man in the present life— His ignorance without 
revelation—The vast importance of our future destiny, and the 
folly of being indifferent to our fate—The character of those 
who are willing to enquire into religious truth—The benefit of 
a proper understanding of its evidences to the Christian—The 
difficulty of approaching the subject with an unprejudiced mind, 
and the necessity ofa right disposition in order to receive truth 
on any subject, as well as on the subject of religion—General 
definition of religion—There are hut two kinds of religion of 
which the origin is known to us, viz. Christianity and Mahome- 
tanism—Comparison of their evidences—All that is good in 
the system of Mahomet drawn from the Bible—Result, that 
Christianity is the true religion, or else that there is none—Ex- 
amination of the religion of nature—Examination of the religion 
of Philosophers. ; 4 : : p ‘ : 1—13 


DISCOURSE IT. 


{ntroduction—The authorship of the New Testament Scriptures— 
Direct evidences on this question—Testimony of the fathers— 
of the martyrs—of the Emperor Constantine—of the enemies 
of Christianity—Impossibility of the primitive Christians being 
deceived—Practical effect of the rejection or the belief of these 
Scriptures. : Q “ : : : : : 14—30 


x contents. 
4 DISCOURSE ill. 


Question examined whether the writers of the New Testament 
Scriptures could have been deluded in the miraculous facts 
which they relate, or whether they could have deluded others— 
Impossibility of either deception shewn from the nature of the 


cases respectively. : , ; : : ‘ 31—45: 


DISCOURSE IV. 


« 


Question why the Deity should have made his, communications to: 
the human race through men gifted with miraculous powers» 
instead of a direct revelation to each individual, considered, in- 
reference to the objections and hypothesis of the infidel Rous- 


seau. s ° ° ° ° e ° e e 46—64. 


DISCO URSE V. 


Evidence afforded by prophecy—Quality of prophecy—Why ob- 
scure—Necessity for its obscurity—Objection of Rousseau. 
65-85 


DISCOURSE VI. 


Evidence afforded by the establishment of the Church, through 
such agents and in such a period of the world—Reasoning of 
Gibbon on this subject—Its futility exposed. : 86—107 


DISCOURSE VII. 


Remaining objections of infidel writers to the Bible—Alleged in- 
terpolation in the books of Moses and Joshua—Alleged immo-~ 


desty of the Scriptures—Alleged cruelty of the wars against the 
Canaanites—Alleged contradictions of the Scriptures—Specifi- 
cation of contradiction in the Genealogies given by the Evan- 
gelists Matthew and Luke—The argument of Mr. Hume against 
miracles examined—The objection against Christianity derived 
from the depravity of professed believers examined—Conclusion. 
of the discourses. ‘ : j ; 4 108—12¢ 


DISSERTATION. 


CHAPTER I. 


§ 1. Proofs and illustrations of the argument presented in the 
first discourse, drawn from the writings of Voltaire, Rousseau, 
Hume, and. Pascal. : : ‘ ; ‘ p- 181—135 

§ 2. Proofs of the assertion that Mahomet derived all that was 
good in his system from the Bible, and that his success was pro- 
duced by the sword, exhibited from the contents of the Koran— 
Opinion of Tucker in his ‘ Light of Nature’ on the first of these 
points. : 5 , : : Br he a 1385—138 

§ 3. View of the discordant schemes of philosophers exhibited 
by extracts from Cicero, Voltaire, and Roussezu. 1388—146 


CHAPTER II. 


§ 1. List of the Christian writers who flourished in the next age 
after the Apostles, with some notices of their works,—proving 
the canon of Scripture. , : i 147—156 

§ 2. List of the Christian writers of the third century, with some 
notices of their works—proving the canon of Scripture—List 
of Sacred books set forth by the Council of Laodicea. 157—163 


CHAPTER III. 


§ 1. Testimony borne by heathen writers to the truth of the 
Gospel facts—Acts of Pontius Pilate—Proposal of the Emperor 
Tiberius that Christ should be enrolled amongst the gods—Ex- 


Cop , , 

" _ , 

Y ; - 
: Pays feet 


Conclusion of the Dissert 
» i sy s 


nd ake 


DIS COMRSE Te! a 


Rom. X. 10. 
WITH THB HEART MAN BELIEVETH UNTO RIGHTEOUSNESs, 
e 


Wuetuer we look around us, my brethren, and 
consider the actual condition of our race, with the 
eye of a mere observer, or look within us, and reflect 
upon the cares, the doubts, the sorrows, and uncertain- 
ties of our own lot, there is nothing which ought to 
interest us so deeply as the promises of the Gospel. 
Stripped of the hopes of religion, what is man ? We 
come jnto life, helpless and suffering. Trials and 
difficulties hang upon our every step. We grow up to 
maturity, with aspiring views and ardent expectations. 
We grasp at happiness in every form of self-gratifica- 
tion. We seek it in labor and in toil. Wealth, 
ambition, pleasure, ease, are all Supposed capable of 
yielding satisfaction to the heart. Friendships are 
formed and broken. Love inioxieates and deceives, 
Our years roll on in the contests of selfishness and the 


_ short and feverish delights of passion ; and, at length, 


we sink into the grave, a:ter passing our whole mortal 
existence in a succession of petty troubles and en- 


_ Srossing trifles, while the happiness we sought for 
_ eluded our pursuit at every turn. 


1 


2 


Without revelation, impenetrable darkness rests 
upon the whole system of our being. Why we exist 
at all—whether there is a God who made us, and if 
there be, for what purposes we are made ;—why 
it ig that we are enveloped in mystery ; the faculties 
of the mind—the powers of the body—the nature 
of the soul—all mocking our best attempts to under- 
‘stand them ;—why it is that men always praise virtue, 
while they so rarely practice it, and never exhibit 
it in its true perfection ;—why they are always con- 
demning vice, and yet the world is filled with it ;— 
why they are always pursuing knowledge, ‘and yet are 
never satisfied—why they are always sighing for hap- 
piness, and yet are never content—why they all dread 
death, and yet never escape it ;—whether there be a 
state hereafter, and what is its condition—whether 
eternity will open on us, when we close our connexion 
with time, or whether the stroke of dissolution anni- 
hilates our being ;—-whether the mounting spirit with- 
in us, with all its sublime energies and high desires, is 
destined for another and a nobler sphere; or whether 
the blessed sympathies of affection, the ardor of hope, 
the light of joy, the pulse of generous emotion, the 
beams of genius and the kindlings of imagination, must 
perish, forever, within the narrow confines of the 
tomb ;—no man knows, or can know, how to solve any 
of these questions, until he learns his answer from the 
Word of God. And yet, surely, no enquiries are so 
deeply important to us all. Surely, indifference to the 
truth, upon such subjects, is, of all things, the most 
absurd. Men are active to avoid the least evils; they 
are prompt to secure the slightest advantages; they 


are moved at every peril which threatens their fortune, — 


jee On 


3 


or their health, or their family. How strange, then, 
to see them unmoved, when the question of eternity 
is before them. How deplorable to see them calm and 
regardless, when the truth of the system which assures 
them either of heaven or of hell, is to be decided. 
Surely, to a rational mind, this want of solicitude, in 
the most weighty question which concerns humanity, 
exhibits a monstrous instance of infatuation or of folly. 

But while there are some, unhappily, who not only 
close their eyes upon the realities of their condition, 
but even repel, with levity and contempt, every argu- 
ment in favor of the Word of God; there are othérs 
who estimate more justly the value and importance 
of this subject, and who only hesitate. to make a reli- 
- gious profession, because they have no established 
confidence in the truth of the Christian system. Nor in 
a day like ours, when infidelity abounds, and assumes the 
boldest front of audacity, should it be thought a shame 
to be troubled with doubts. The only shame isnot to 
be troubled when we have them. For, after all, touse 
the words of the admirable Pascal,* ‘‘ there are but two 
classes of mankind who can be called reasonable ; 
those who serve God with all their heart, because 
they know him, and those who seek him with all their 
heart, because they know him not.”’ To be sensible of 
our ignorance of religion, and yet to make no effort to 
be informed—to be sensible that Christianity may be 
true, and yet to sit down, in utter scorn and gaiety, to 
take part with its revilers—this is indeed the height of 
mad absurdity. The Christian is bound to pity and 
pray for such deluded minds; but to argue with them 


* Pensées de Pascal, tome II. p. 20. 


4 


is useless. It is only for the willing—the rational 
enquirer, who is ready to approach the subject with 
fairness and candor, that we enter upon a series of 
discourses designed to shew the evidences of our faith. 
To such, we know that the proof must be found ample 
and conclusive; or, if not, the defect will rest on our 
incapacity to do it the justice it deserves. 

We would not have it supposed, however, that none 
but those who doubt are interested in such a discussion. 
The truth of our holy religion should be deeply in- 
vestigated by every established disciple of the Cross. 
For how, my Christian brethren, can you give ‘an 
answer to every man of the reason of the hope that is 
in you, with meekness and fear,’ unless you know the 
arguments on which we rest the truth of the system? 
How can you answer the cavils of the unbeliever, in 
case you should be exposed to his attacks ; or how can 
you be sure of keeping your own faith uninjured, if 
you have no knowledge of the proofs which so abun- 
dantly establish the certainty of the Gospel? To you, 
therefore, who are Christians, as well as to those who 
may have doubts which they are willing to abandon 
on sufficient proof, we design to address our present 
undertaking ; relying on the blessing of the God of 
truth, who can alone enable us effectually to exhibit, 
or you to receive, the Gospel of salvation, | 

Let it not be imagined, however, an easy thing, or 
a matter of course, that the disposition of candor and 
fairness which the evidences of our religion demand, 
will therefore be exercised. ‘True, it is easy to prom- 
ise candor. Jt is easy to profess a readiness to believe. 
It is easy to say, ‘I wish that I could believe.’ But 
yet with all this, let it be distinctly understood, that 


5 


the want of an honest desire to be convinced is the 
only serious obstacle in the way of conviction. ‘ With 
the heart,’ saith our text, ‘man believeth unto right- 
eousness ;? and without the heart, that is, without a 
sincere inclination towards the truth, isit not plain 
that conviction must be impossible ? 

It may be said, indeed, that this is demanding the 
operation of a previous prejudice in favour of religion ; 
whereas all that ought to be asked, is a fair neutrality 
inthe mind. But a very slight reflection will shew 
the error of this position. In point of fact, we know 
that nothing is expected to be learned by a scholar, 
until he desires to learn. The inclination to knowledge 
is indispensable, in all the branches of human education. 
Why, then, should not the knowledge of religious truth 
require the same? And we know, further, that an entire 
neutrality upon the subject of Christianity, never did. 
exist, and never can. There is not a heart in this 
assembly, nor in any other, which does not feel a 
secret bias, either for or against it. And this secret 
bias, when unfriendly—this actual unwillingness to be 
convinced—this voluntary hostility to the truth,—is 


what really stands in the way of conviction. It isa 


familiar fact in law, in government, in politics, and in 
science, that argument never produces its proper effect 
on a prejudiced mind. And, of course, religion is 
not peculiar in her claims on our disposition to believe. 
She only demands what every thing demands—an 
inclination to do her justice. Christianity does not 
profess to satisfy the stubborn and contradictory humor 
of wilful opposition. The seed of divine truth is not 


expected to take abiding root in any but an honest and 


good heart ; that is, a heart which inclines to the truth 
1* 


6 


of God, with a feeling of kindliness and sincerity. The 
proud intellect of self-conceit, the arrogant temper of 
disputation, must be subdued to the disposition of 
docility and meekness, before it is possible, in the 
nature of things, to learn even the wisdom of earth— 
much less, the wisdom of heaven. 

To you then, my brethren, who believe, and who 
listen for the sake of defending and establishing, more 
firmly, the truth which you already love ; and to you, 
my friends, if any such be present, who, though you 
believe not, are yet willing to believe, and disposed to 
receive, with favor and kindness, the evidence of the 
truth of heaven ; we address this preliminary discourse 
on the subject ; humbly beseeching the Father of lights 
to guide the minds, both of the preacher and the 
hearers, so as to confirm and settle you in the know- 
ledge of eternal life and joy. 

Religion, as we shall all agree, imports the acknow- 
ledgment of the being of God, and the establishment 
of such relations between him and us, as shall promise, 
on his part, the power and goodness necessary to 
sustain and preserve us in this life, and finally make 
us happy in another world ; and, secure on our part, the 
consequent duties of reverence and love, of worship 
and devotion. This general description applies to all 
religions. Whether God is believed to be but one, 
or many beings ; whether his willis declared in books, 
or whether it rests upon remote tradition ; whether his 
service is considered to be reasonable, free, and holy, 
or whether it is celebrated, as among the heathen, by 
obscenity, and cruelty, and blood ; still, these general 
ideas belong to all ; and each, alike, calls upon mankind 
to confess its truth, and pursue its dictates. 


7 


But among these various systems of religion, there 
are only two, with the rise and establishment of which 
we are acquainted, and the history of which is clearly 
written in volumes that are within the reach of all. 
The Christian system is the one, the Mahometan is the 
other. They are the only two, which agree in the 
acknowledgment of one living and true God; which 
are free from the horrors and absurdities of heathen 
idolatry and superstition; and which place the obedi- 
ence of the worshipper in acts of faith, and duties of 
benevolent morality. Ofthese two, however, Christ- 
lanity is the elder by six hundred years. The Koran of 
Mahomet is full of passages borrowed from the Bible: 
Nay, he acknowledges Jesus to be a great prophet, 
inspired and strengthened by the Holy Ghost ; so that 
many have regarded his system as a corrupted Christ- 
lanity, rather than a distinct religion. Without pausing, 
however, to examine this position, let us briefly 
compare the strength of their respective claims. And 
first, we see the New Testament recorded by eight 
independent writers, who were disinterested in the 
question ; whereas Mahomet is his own historian. Be- 
sides this, Christianity rests its claims on the foundation 
of miracles and prophecy ; whereas Mahometanism 
expressly disclaims all public miracles, and has no 
prophecies except what are evidently borrowed from 
the book of God. Still further, Christianity was estab- 
lished by men who laid down their lives in proof of 
their sincerity, and suffered the loss of all things, even 
during life, for the sake of propagating its truth; 
whereas Mahomet served his own earthly interest by 
his system, and made it the instrument of his exaltation 
tothe pinnacle of ambition. Once more, Christianity 


8 


spread in the face of worldly opposition, although its 
only weapons were truth, and peace, and unresisting 
meekness; but Mahometanism was planted in strife 
and fierce contention, and its triumph was established 
in blood. Between these two religions, therefore, 
there cannot be, and there never was, the slightest hes- 
itation, in an impartial and a rational mind. Between 
Mahometanism, indeed, and Paganism, there would be 
as little question, that the system of Mahomet was more 
likely to be the truth, than the dreadful and atrocious 
absurdities of heathen idolatry. ’ Consequently, it 
might not be difficult to account for the rapid and exten- 
sive conquests of this system, amongst the dark super- 
stitions of the East. But in a comparison with Christ- 
ianity, the decision of the mind is instantaneous against 
the impostor of Mecca. There cannot be the balancing 
of amoment between them. It may truly be conven- 
ient for the man who will have no religion, to confound 
their respective claims; but no reflecting intellect 
ever paused in its choice. No infidel ever rejected 
the Bible, in order to adopt the Koran. No Christian 
people ever gave up their faith, in homage to the 
truth or evidence of the Mahometan. Fear and des- 
potism have made their outward proselytes unquestion- 
ably, but the poor Greeks have shewn how ineffectual 
was the contest of Mahomet against the faith of Christ, 
although centuries of oppression and ignorance have 
borne, with all their accumulated force, upon their 
allegiance to the Gospel. | 
The inference, therefore, which we wish to establish 
in this first step of our argument, is one which, we 
presume, can give no mind any trouble. If Mahome- 
tanism be so entirely superior to heathenism, by 


9 


reason of its being freed from idolatry, and obscenity, 
and human sacrifices, and cruelties without end ; while 
yet all its purity and excellence are drawn from the 
Bible, and its pretensions cannot bear one moment’s 
comparison with the proofs of the Christian system ; 
then it results that our choice must be between the 
Christian religion and none. The God of the Scriptures 
must be the true God, or we have no Deity. The 
Scriptures must be a revelation from him, or we have 
no revelation. The proof which Christianity affords, 
of the immortality of the soul, of a future judgment, 
of the happiness of the righteous, and the misery of 
the wicked, must be sufficient and complete, or we 
have no proof whatever in relation to these most im- 
portant of all subjects. The light of Christianity must 
be the true light, or all is darkness; and not one ray 
of hope is left to cheer the miseries of earth, or dissi- 
pate the awful horrors of the tomb. 

It may be denied, however, that this is the necessary 


consequence. Jt may be said, that our rejection of 


Christianity will still leave us the religion of nature, 
and that reason dictates as much upon the subject, as 
it is necessary for man to know. Let us, therefore, 


“consider this branch of the alternative, and ask what 


this religion of nature means. 

Does it mean the religion which men, in a state of 
nature, adopt? Does it mean the religion of the un- 
civilized barbarian? Assuredly not; for this would 
lead, at once, to all the cruel absurdities of heathenism. 
Does it mean the religion which reason suggests, 
without any instruction or guide, beyond the exercise 
of its own innate powers? If so, then it would be, 


strictly, no religion whatever. There have been some 


10 


cases, though few, where men have come to years 
of maturity, without any communication with their 
fellow beings ; and, in every instance, they were found, 
not only destitute of any thing like religion, but 
apparently destitute of language, and degraded to a 
condition searcely above the brutes. A far more 
extensive set of observations in the case of the deaf 
and dumb, have established the fact, that there is no 
spontaneous religion—no idea of the being of a God, 
of a future state, or any other religious doctrine, in the 
mind of man, until he is instructed. And this conclu- 
sion, settled as it is, on careful enquiry, and unopposed 
by a single ‘instance on the other side, ought to put 
down the phrase ‘religion of nature,’ as an utter 
absurdity. The truth is, that there is no such thing. 
But perhaps the kind of religion which the objector 
would embrace, is that which the philosophers of 
ancient or modern times have promulgated ; and if so, 
our next question would be, how he would make his 
choice? Some of the ancient philosophers believed 
in many gods; some thought there was none ; and 
others, that there were gods, but that it was beneath 
their dignity to take any notice of human affairs. And. 
amongst the moderns, the same variety of sentiment 
exists. Some have been actual Atheists, as Spinoza 
and Mirabeau. Some have been Deists, as Herbert, 
Rousseau, Volney, Hume, and many others. Some 
teach that there is no difference between vice and 
virtue, that there is no future state, and that this life 
is the whole of our existence. Others believe that the 
soul is immortal, and that there is a judgment to come, 
but only because it seems to them a more reasonable 
belief than the opposite. All agree in vilifying the Bible 


11 


in some way or other, although some of them praise its 
morality and its sublimity in the warmest terms ; but 
no one pretends to give any proof that his system is the 
true one, beyond the arguments of his own reason. 
Now, if our objector designs to cast off Christianity, in 
order to take his notions of religion from the philoso- 
phic school, we ask, which of them he will select, and 
on what principles he will make the selection? They 
all agree in pulling down the Christian system, but they 
differ, egregiously, in the structure which they would 
build upon its ruins. They all deny that our proofs 


are sufficient, and then modestly ask us to adopt their 


notions, without any proof whatever. They scorn the 
evidence of miracle and prophecy, and talk about the 
superior claims of reason ; but the reason of one proves 
that there is a God, and the reason of another proves 
that there is none. The reason of a third establishes 
the immortality of the soul, and the reason of a fourth 
laughs at it, as ane absurd superstition. Where is the 
guide—where the teacher, upon whose system the 
heart and understanding of a searcher after truth can 
repose with security? Alas! bewildered and lost must 
be the mind, that attempts to follow the mazes of ex- 
travagance and impiety, set before him by the infidel 
philosophers of the world. Many of them were men 
of splendid talents; commanding eloquence, and ex- 
tensive learning; but the pride of intellect, and the 
thirst after fame misled them. They lost the docility 
and candor so necessary to every searcher after truth ; 
and instead of being friends to the happiness, the 
morality, and the eternal welfare of their fellows, they 
spread around them the infection of a moral pestilence, 
and scattered the flowers of genius upon the path of 
ruin and despair. 


12 


We repeat, therefore, my brethren, that the choice 
we have to make in this matter, is between the religion 
of the Scriptures, and none. There is no religion of 
nature. This is but a delusive title, given by men 
to systems of their own devising ; in which the little 
good they contained, was stolen from the Bible; but 
put together, after their own fancy, without a shadow 
of proof or authority. The philosophers who have 
distinguished themselves in this way, differed among 
themselves; and their notions were utterly useless to 
direct the oaniet to guide the aims, to restrain the 
passions, or to poneas the bearts of men. Who ever 
saw a congregation of Deists established in the worship 
of the God whom they pretended to acknowledge? 
Who ever saw the family of a Deist gathered together, 
to unite with him in praise and prayer? Who ever 
heard that the belief of a Deist had power to assuage 
the pains of a dying bed, and enable the spirit to de- 
part in the confidence of hope andgoy? Oh no! my 
brethren ; it is only the religion of Christ, which pos- 
sesses those characters of true conviction. It is only 
the Gospel of Christ which can purify and strengthen 
the soul. Other systems may amuse the fancy, but. 
this alone can take hold of the affections and the will. 
The religion of the Deist may engage the intellect, 
but it is only the religion of the Bible a can warm 
the heart. 

May you be enabled, then, to enter upon the inves- 
tigation of the evidences of our sacred faith, with a 
ready and a willing mind, animated by an honest love 
of truth, and freed from the blinding influence of pre- 
judice and passion. And may you, my Christian friends 
and brethren, rejoice in the reflection, that you are in 


13 


possession of such inestimable privileges, as are set 
before us in the Word of God. While so many are 
sitting in the thick gloom of heathen superstition, 
what a blessing should we not esteem it to have the 
light of life! While so many are wandering after 
the wild-fire of false philosophy, what a blessing is it 
to behold the Sun of Righteousness, the glory of God, 
in the face of the Redeemer! O! let us magnify, 
with one accord, the mercy and the grace which have 
led us to the knowledge of the truth ; and while, ‘ with 
our hearts, we believe unto righteousness,’ let us ‘make 
confession unto salvation,’ ‘not only with our lips, but 
in our lives,’ by giving ourselves up unto the service 
of the Saviour, and living ‘righteously, soberly, and 
godly in this present world.’ 


2 


RS 


* 


DISCOURSE Il. 


Joun, XX. 30, 31. 
AND MANY OTHER SIGNS TRULY DID JES!'S IN THE PRESENCE OF HIS DISCIPLES 
WHICH ARE NOT WRITTEN IN THIS BOOK, BUT THESE ARE WRITTEN, THAT Yi 
MIGHT BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD} AND THAT 
BELIEVING, YE MIGHT HAVE LIFE IN HIS NAME. | 


We are to enter, in the present discourse, my breth- 


ren, upon the first topic of the evidences of Christianity, 
viz. the authenticity of the New Festament Scriptures, 
in which are included all those doctrines of the faith, 
comprehensively called the Gospel. In the language of 
the text, these books were written, not for the gratifi- 
eation of literary taste or ambition, nor yet to be a 
record of passing events, for the sake of ministering to 
public curiosity or national pride. None of the common 
motives of authorship are assigned for their production. 
No, my brethren, they were written that we might 
believe in Christ, the Son of God, and that, believing, 
we might have life in his name. If the motive for 
writing these Scriptures were thus exalted and pecu- 
liar,—if our life—our eternal life, be dependent on 
their truth, with how deep and lively an interest should 
we attend to the establishment of their claims. For 


ereatures such as we are—standing continually on 


/ 


16 
the verge of the unseen world, and, within the com- 
pass of each little week, beholding some relative, 
or friend, or neighbor, departing to his final home ;— 
called, day by day, to perform the last sad offices 
to those we loved; and without one ray of hope, 
either for them, or for ourselves, other than that which 
_ beams from the light of the Gospel—O! how precious 


_ ~ should be the truth which assures us, that there is life 


and happiness beyond the grave ;—that the spirits, 
whose heavenly-mindedness shed an atmosphere of 
purity and gentleness around them, while on earth, are 
still solicitous for our welfare, and waiting for our com- 
ing in the Paradise of God ;—that the countenances 
on which we have so often gazed with fondness and 
delight, will again meet our eyes in the lustre of im- 
mortality ;—that the trumpet shall sound, and the dead 
shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be chan- 
ged,—yes, changed into the blessed likeness of the Son 
of God, and made partakers of celestial bliss, in the 
world of boundless joy and glory. 

But alas! we live with continual cause to mourn 
over the blindness and unbelief, the indifference and 
hardness of heart, which lead men to reject this very 
Gospel, to put away from them this very assurance of 
the highest mercy, which the love of the Redeemer 
could grant to our sinful race. They object, and cavil, 
and dispute, upon the very existence of our revelation. 
They deny the truth of the sacred history. They assert 
that the Bible is not what it purports to be; but that 
it is a fabrication, imposed upon mankind by the artifices 
of the priesthood. And thus, it becomes our duty to — 

' defend the first principles of the faith, to shew, from 
time to time, the absurdity and unfairness of this accu- 


17 


sation, and to demonstrate the ample sufficiency of the 
proofs which establish the authority of the Scriptures. 
Many of these men, we are well aware, are hardened, 
and callous to conviction, without any proper disposition 
of heart in favor of the truth. But others are not 
destitute of all sensibility. They are misled, but not 
hostile—they are blinded, but they are not unwilling 
to see the light. For such as these, my Christian 
brethren, our prayers and efforts ought to be constant, 
that they may come to the knowledge of the only 
Saviour. For the sake, too, of the young enquirers, 
who look to us, more especially, for instruction, and 
even for the sake of arming our own belief against 
the assaults of infidelity,—for all these reasons, ought 
we not to enter upon the subject, with willing and with 
serious minds? May the Spirit of Truth grant us his 
presence and his blessing, that we may speak and hear, 
as those who labor for eternity. | 
The single question to which we shall ask your 
attention, in the present discourse, is the fundamental 
enquiry as to the authorship of the New Testament. 
It might, indeed, be supposed more satisfactory, to 
commence our proof where the Bible commences its 
history. A little reflection, however, will shew that 
the course proposed, is not only more direct, but more 
conclusive ; because the truth of the Old Testament 
does not necessarily include the truth of the New,— 
an assertion plainly proved by the Jews, who believe 
the Old Testament, while they deny the Redeemer. 
But the truth of the New Testament does necessarily 
include the truth of the Old, because our Lord and his 
Apostles constantly refer to the books of Moses, the 


Psalms, and the Prophets, as to the Scriptures of 
Q* 


18 


truth—-the Oracles of God—the language of inspira- 
tion, from which not one jot or tittle should in anywise 
pass away, until all be fulfilled. Of course, the evi- 
dence which establishes the New Testament, estab- 
lishes the whole Bible, and of this evidence, the 
question of authenticity is the first branch. 

Now the New Testament consists of twenty-seven 
separate books, published originally in different places 
and at different times, by no less than eight different 
authors, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, 
James, and Jude. Being all original preachers of the 
Gospel, eyewitnesses, workers of miracles, and held 
in entire reverence by the first Churches of Christ, 
their several works were bound up together, and 
considered equal in point of authority; and, since that 
time, the whole isregarded as one book. Butit must be 
remembered, that, in reality, here are eight independ- 
ent witnesses, all true, or all false ;—their books are 
all genuine, or all forged; and therefore, the number 
of these testimonies ought, in reason, to have its 
proper influence upon the question. 

The unbeliever hesitates not to say, that the whole 
is a fabrication—a base imposture. He thinks it the 
interest of the priesthood to invent such a system, and 
palm it on the people ; and imagines that such was, in 
point of fact, the mode of its introduction. And, for- 
getting the maxim of justice, that fraud is in no case to 
be presumed, but proved, he boldly casts on us the 
burden of, evidence, Ad challenges the Christian 
Church to demonstrate that the books of the New 
Testament were written by the men whose names they 
bear, and at the time alleged in the sacred history. 

It might be enough, in answer to such a requisition, 


19 


to reply, that the authorship of the Christian Scriptures 
was not disputed until the rise of modern infidelity ; 
that the primitive Church, who alone had the opportu- 
nity of knowing the fact, settled it with universal 
consent; and that the canon of the New Testament 
had enjoyed the quiet prescription of fifteen hundred 
years, before the reckless hardihood of the last century, 
presumed to raise the question. But we are willing 
to examine the point upon its merits, without claiming 
‘the benefit of this prescription ; and we shall have no 
difficulty in proving the authorship of these sacred 
books, by the very same evidences that infidelity itself 
admits to be conclusive in every similar enquiry. 

_ We begin by asking the unbeliever whether he has 
any ancient books, the authors of which are handed 
down to our own time, without any serious dispute or 
cavil? And to this enquiry it must be answered,—Yes, 
several,—the poems of Homer, the histories of Herod- 
tus and Thucydides, the works of Xenophon, Lucian, 
Plutarch, Epictetus, and others of the Greeks, Cicero 
and Cesar, Virgil, Horace, Tacitus, Sallust, Pliny, and 
many others of the Latins, some of them long before, 
some at the same period, and some a very little after 
the dates of the books of the New Testament. We 
ask how the objector knows that these classic works 
were written by the authors whose names they bear? 
The answer is,—Because they have been handed down 
to us, from that time, without any contradiction or dis- 
pute, as the works Be these men; because they are 
recognized and appealed to by all the other writers 
who have lived since their day, and by each other; 
because a conspiracy so extensive, in favor of a literary 
fraud, is highly improbable, not to say impossible, in its 


20 


own nature; and because, had it been possible, there 
was no motive of interest to induce any one to attempt 
it. | 
These are satisfactory reasons, it must be confessed, 
why men should receive, without hesitation, the works 
of classic antiquity ; and hence, it is no wonder, that 
all agree upon the sufficiency of the testimony. But 
now, we aver that all these reasons apply to the books 
of the New Testament, with far greater force, so as 


to render any mistake upon the subject of their au- 


thenticity absolutely impossible. And this we shall 
next endeavor to shew, availing oursélves of the lucid 
arrangement of a late admired author.* 


First, then, let us trace up the Scriptures, to see the 


positive proof of their transmission from generation to 
generation. We take it for granted, that no one ques- 
tions whether our present Bible is the same which was 
appealed to throughout Europe, at the time of the 
reformation in the sixteenth century, about three hun- 
dred years ago. Going back a century and a half, we 
ask whether it was not admitted as fully in the days of 
John Wicliffe, who translated it into the English 
tongue. We may next go another step farther back, to 
the time of Grosseteste, the celebrated opponent of 
Pope Innocent III., in A.D. 1240, or to the days of 


Anselm, Bishop of Canterbury, under William Rufus, . 


who wrote a treatise against those that derided the 
inspiration of the Scriptures ; and we demand, were not 
the same books universally acknowledged then ? 
From this, let us go back a little farther, to the time 
of Alfred the Great, who founded or restored the 


* Rev, Daniel Wilson, now Bishop of Calcutta. 


21 


famous University of Oxford, and translated the Scrip- 
tures into Saxon, for the general use of his subjects. 
This brings us to the ninth century. 

The next step in the track of antiquity will take us 
to the time of the venerable Bede, born in A. D. 672, 
whose fame filled the whole Christian world, and who, 
among other works of high reputation, wrote comments 
on the Epistles of St. Paul. | 
- The next brings us to the days of Gregory the Great, 
in A.D. 590, who sent Augustine and his companions to 
England, in order to convert the inhabitants. In the 
same century, the sacred books were received by many 
Christian Churches, on the Continent of Europe, 
through Gregory, Theodoret, and Fulgentius. Then 
we have the testimony of St. Austin, Jerome, and 
Chrysostom, in the fifth century; of St. Ambrose , 
Athanasius, and Eusebius, in the fourth ; of Cyprian, 
Origen, and Tertullian, in the third ; and of Irenezus in 
the second century, who was the disciple of Polycarp, 
the pupil of St. John, the Apostle. 

Here, then, is an unbroken chain of testimony, 
shewing how the writings of the Evangelists and 
Apostles were handed down, from the very period of 
their publication, to our own day. But having thus 
traced them by going back to the period of antiquity, 
let us now reverse the order of remark, for the sake 
of shewing another view of the evidence, in some 
respects more precise and satisfactory. 

It is manifest, that on the first publication of the 
twenty-seven books composing the New Testament, all 
the Churches would not receive them at once. The 
art of printing being then unknown, it would require 
time to propagate them and multiply copies, so that 


22 


the Fathers of the first age, who were coeval with the 
Apostles, could not be expected to have the whole 
collection completed and arranged as we see them 
now. | 

Accordingly, we see that the references made by 
the six Apostolical fathers, in their writings, are less 
formal and precise than afterwards, eet the lan- 
guage of the New Testament Scriptures had not yet 
become a part of education. Their testimony is inci- 
dental, given in simplicity for practical purposes ; ‘and 
yet the quotations and allusions in these six writers, 
amount to more than two hundred and twenty, and 
recognize nineteen or twenty of the sacred books. 

But in the second century, the evidence is more 
express and full; for adversaries and heretics, ene-. 
mies from without and domestic foes within, gave 
oceasion for much discussion. The quotations now 
become so numerous, that a large part of the New 
Testament might be compiled from them. In the 
apology of Justin Martyr, (born A. D. 89, died 164, ) 
there are about two hundred. In énibag (Awd. 
§7—202) there are more and larger quotations from 
the small volume of the New Testament, than of all 
the works of Cicero, though of such uncommon excel- 
lence for thought and style, in the writers of all char- 
acters for several ages.* The list of quotations, in 
Tertullian alone, occupies nearly thirty folio pages. In 
this age, also, the public reading of the Scriptures in 
‘the Churches became general; they were collected 
into volumes, and translations of them were made into 
Latin and Chai 


* Lardner. 


23 


From the third and fourth centuries, more than a 
hundred authors have reached us, who bear witness to 
the sacred books. Catalogues of them were now 


made out, translations of them multiplied, and com- 


mentaries were composed. Public libraries were 
devoted to the preservation of copies, and councils of 
hundreds of Bishops recognized their authority. 

To shew the affection and esteem in which they 
were held, we may mention a few facts. In the per- 
secution of A. D.303,one of the most affecting sights 
was to see the sacred Scriptures burned in the market 
places. The martyrs were asked if they had any 
divine books or parchments. They replied, We have, 
but we will not give them up; it is better for usto be 


consumed with fire, than to give up the Holy Scrip- 


tures. 

It is related of the Emperor Constantine, who was 
converted A. D. 312, that he had a kind of Church 
in his palace, where, taking the sacred books into his 
own hands, he attentively read and meditated upon 
them, before the whole assembly of his courtiers. 
On one occasion, this Emperor writes thus to Euse- 
bius, the ecclesiastical historian. ‘The city that 
bears our name, (Constantinople, ) through the good- 
ness of Providence, increases daily; and there will 
be occasion for erecting in it more Churches. Where- 
fore we hope you will approve of our design, and take 
care to procure fifty copies of the Divine Scriptures, 
which you know to be necessary in Churches, of fine 
parchment, legible and easily portable, that they may 
be the fitter for use, transcribed by such as are skilful.” 
This same Emperor summoned the famous council of 
Nice, where three hundred and eighteen Bishops, 


24 


besides innumerable presbyters, deacons, and others, 
were called to determine concerning the Arian heresy. 
The Emperor (says Theodoret) recommended them 


to decide all things by the Scriptures.—It is a pity, 


he said, that now, when their enemies were subdued, 
they should differ among themselves, especially when 
they had the doctrine of the Holy Ghost in writing. 
But this, it may be said, is the testimony of friends. 
Let us then turn to the fact, that the bitterest enemies 
of Christianity, in the primitive days, acknowledged 
the genuineness of the Gospel history. Thus Celsus, 
the heathen philosopher, A. D. 175, advances all im- 
aginable objections against the faith, with much inge- 
nuity and scorn. But he never questions the authen- 
ticity of the sacred books. He never doubts that they 
were written by the men whose names they bear. Had 
the least cloud of uncertainty rested upon them, at 
that early period, what a triumphant argument would 
it not have afforded him. : ! ed 
In the third century, Porphyry appeared, an able 
and determined adversary of our religion. Yet he, 


too, admitted the books ; and it is well remarked, that 


this admission is the more important, because he shew- 
ed a disposition to reject them if he could, by actually 
denying the authenticity of the prophecy of Daniel. 


To none of the books of the New Testament, howev- 


er did he make any objection, so far as their authenti- 
city was concerned. | . 

Lastly, in the fourth century, Julian, the apostate 
Emperor of Rome, attacks the religion of the Gospel 
with all his power. But neither does he venture to 
call in question the truth of the Scriptures, nor charge 
the Christian priesthood with imposing false books 


~ es es 


25 


upon the world. So far from it, that he even allows 
the principal facts of the gospel histories, and argues 
upon them, as the admitted works of the Apostles and 
followers of ‘the Redeemer. 

Where, then, is the defect of proof on this branch 
of our subject—when, from the very age in which the 


Apostles wrote, the testimony of friends and foes alike 


establishes the fact, that these were their writings ? 
What is all the evidence of all the classic authors 
together, in comparison with the force of this, espe- 
cially when the importance of the point itseif, in the 
opinion of the early Christians, is taken into consid- 
eration? 

For let us only wei for one moment, the interest 


attached to the authenticity of a poet or historian, with 


that which invested the Oracles of God. Whether 
Homer, or Virgil, or Herodotus, or Sallust, or Xeno- 
phon, or Cesar, were, in truth, the authors of the 
books which were received under their names, was a 
question of small consequence indeed. There was 
no system of faith, no relinquishment of property, no 
exposure to persecution, involved in the enquiry. But 
not so with the Scriptures. These books taught doe- 
trines which overset all the existing notions and prac- 
tices of mankind. They commanded the open war- 
fare of the disciple of the Cross, against the false gods 
which were universally adored, throughout the whole 
Greek and Roman empire. They separated the be- 
liever from father and mother, sister and brother, 


‘kindred and home. The faith of Christ led his disei- 


ples to imprisonment, drove them into banishment, or 

bound them for the slaughter. And would they not, 

then, look narrowly into these Scriptures? Would 
3 


26 


they make such sacrifices on the authority of books, 
on which a single doubt could hang? But again, let 
us ask how any man, or set of men, could have impo- 
sed upon them, books written under the names of 
the Apostles? For instance, St. Paul writes two 
epistles to the congregation of Corinth. Would any 
one have dared to forge these epistles while the 
Apostle was yet alive? And after his death, how 
should such epistles have been palmed upon these 
congregations, when every individual belonging to 
them could have said, that they never heard of them 
before? 

Lastly, let it be noted that the character and style of 
these Scriptures preclude the possibility of such an 
imposition. They are not a history of ancient things, 
which took place during far distant ages, and in which 
errors might be inserted without detection or danger. 
But they are addressed to eyewitnesses; they speak 
of what had just happened ; they appeal to those who 
were as deeply concerned as the writers themselves, 
in the truths related ; who could not have been de- 
ceived, and who would not have tolerated the slightest 
attempt at imposition, where the interests of their souls 
and bodies were concerned so deeply. From the 
whole, therefore, we may draw this irresistible conclu- 
sion, that any mistake as to the real authors of those 
New Testament Scriptures was impossible ;—that these 
twenty-seven books were certainly written by the 
eight men whose names they bear, and could not have 
been imposed upon the primitive Churches by any 
management whatever. 

Many collateral arguments might Ne presented, my 
brethren, on this point of authorship, in reply to the 


27 


shallow and absurd allegation of modern unbelievers, 
that the books themselves are a forgery of ‘the priest- 
hood :—an allegation, by the way, which they do 
not even attempt to prove. But, persuaded as we 
are, that those who are not convinced by the facts 
already detailed, must labor under difficulties of the 
heart, rather than of the head ;—and desirous not to 
detain you too long on this branch of the subject, we 
shall rest it here, and take it for granted in our future 
discourses, because sufficiently proved, that the books 
of the New Testament were actually written by the 
ostensible authors, and published at the times and in 
the manner set forth in their contents. Our next dis- 
course will be directed to the truth of the facts related 
in those books, so as to ascertain whether it was pos- 
sible for the authors to have been deceived, or to have 
borne false witness. And we think that no human 
intellect can desire a stronger demonstration than 
belongs to that question, if we are only enabled to do 
it common justice. | 

But after all, my brethren, let us remember, that we 
gain nothing by admitting the authenticity or even the 
truth of the Scriptures, if we do no more. These 
things were written that we might believe in Christ, 
not with the cold assent of the understanding merely, 
not with the external homage of the lip, not even with 
the full formality of an outward profession, but with 
the inward affections of the soul. Thus only, can our 
belief profit us—thus only can we have life in his 
name, ‘These Scriptures must be transcribed into our 
motives, our feelings, our words, our actions ;—for ‘ if 
any man be in Christ, he is anew creature,’ and ‘ with- 


put holiness, no man shall see the Lord.’ 


28 


Let the unbeliever, then, if he will,—continue to 
object and cavil, though in the face of a stronger body 
of testimony, Wan any book on the face of the earth, 
besides the Scriptures, can claim. Let him, if he will,- 
continue to cry out, ‘Fraud and imposition,’ without a 
shadow of reason, and under circumstances where 
imposture was utterly impossible. Let him turn to the 
authors of heathen antiquity with entire faith, and 
vilify that blessed volume, which is a thousand fold 
more worthy of his confidence. But let us take heed, 
that we furnish him with no ground for cavil by our 
inconsistency. Let us beware that the greatest stum- 
bling block in his way, be not the ungodliness of profes- 
sed disciples. And let us pity and pray for all who are 
in the blindness of this delusion. For what is so deplo- 
rable—what so melancholy, as to behold the unbe- 
liever, walking downwards to the tomb, without one 
spark of comfort or of hope in his desolate soul. What 
is so awful, as to see animmortal being, trying to per- 
suade himself that death is an eternal sleep. Or what is 
‘so worthy of supreme compassion, as to see those who 
do think themselves immortal, and yet cast aside the 
only record which establishes the fact ;—those: who 
talk of a judgment to come, and yet acknowledge not 
the blessed Son of God, who is the only Judge ;—those 
who admit a future state, and yet put aside the only 
system of faith and practice, which can teach them 
what it is, and how to attain it. 

But if the life of an unbeliever be thus dark and 
desolate, O! what is his death? Who can contemplate, 
without a thrill of horror, the last hours of that man, 
to whom the approach of dissolution brings nothing 
but the fearful doubts of infidelity, or the gloom of 


29 


utter despair. To plunge at once into annihilation— 


to leave the sympathies of affection—the breathing 


world—the light of heaven—the warm feclings of 
home and kindred—for silence, and corruption, and 
decay. Or to go, we know not where—to suffer, we 
know not what—to be cast by an unseen and mighty 
power, into a condition surrounded by obscurity and 
terror—to be conscious of a thousand sins, and not know 
on what terms they will be pardoned, if at all—to be 
hurried before the awful bar of the Supreme and 
Omnipotent God, without Advocate, Intercessor, or 
Friend,—without any authorized revelation of his will 
to rely on—without any acknowledged promise of 
mercy to plead—O! ’tis horrible to a reflecting mind 
or a heart of any sensibility, to think of such an hour, 
when the poor lost soul has shut itself out from the 
refuge of the Gospel. , Bhs 

Far different is the last end of the true believer. 
The spirit of the ransomed sinner contemplates death 
with more than submission—with placid joy. A peace 


which passeth understanding fills the bosom, and the 


ardent eye of faith seems to behold the present Sa- 
viour, sustaining the soul with the arms of divine 
affection, and comforting it with the promises of Al- 
mighty love. The language, the feelings, the holy 
exhortations, the sublime hopes of such an one—how 
impressive—how powerful the evidence which they 
afford to the truth of Christianity ;—how they rivet 
themselves upon the memory, how they sink into the 
heart, and shed a delicious and thrilling solemnity of 
proof around the blessed promise of salvation. What 
are the discourses of an hundred tongues in comparison 


with the touching influence of the dying hour ? There 


aie 


a‘? 


is a light beaming in the countenance of the departing 
saint, which belongs not to earth. There is a joy 


within the soul which lifts it above every human care 
and affection. That light is an emanation from the 


glory of the Saviour 7 that j Joy is the: foretaste of hea- 
ven ! 

Yes, my beloved brethren! precious, in the sight of 
the Lord, is the death of his Saints. And precious, 
to us, should be the privilege of witnessing it, in all 
its purity, and loveliness of character. May the Spirit 


of God enable us to improve aright, each additional 


~ example of the excellence and power of his Gospel, 
which his Providence affords us, that when our own 
hour shall come, we may be found ‘ with our loins girt, 
and our lights burning,’ ‘believing in Christ the Son 
of God,’ and sustained by the blessed hope that’ we 
too ¢ shell have ie in his name.’ 


a ee sme 


DISCOURSE III. 


Luxg, I. 2. 


THEY DELIVERED THEM UNTO US, WHICH FROM THE BEGINNING WERE EYEWIT; 


NESSES AND MINISTERS OF THE WORD. 

Accorprne to the order of argument laid down, my 
brethren, for our series of discourses on the evidences 
of Christianity, we have shewn the clear ground of 
proof; that the twenty-seven books composing the New 
Testament, must have been written by the eight seve- 
ral authors, whose names they bear. The next topic 
which presents itself for our consideration, is the 
question, whether those men could have written such 
histories, if the facts recorded had not actually happen- 
ed. We must remember that the authors represent 
themselves as eyewitnesses of what they relate. Either 
then, the facts did truly occur, or these witnesses were 
deceived, or else they were impostors. One of these 
three conclusions is infallibly certain. Let us see 
which is the correct one, according to the plain rules 
of right reason and common sense. 

First then, let us try the question, whether the 
Apostles and disciples of our Lord could have been 
deceived; and this we shall best understand, by re- 
fleeting upon the circumstances in which they were 
placed, when he appeared amongst them. 


32 


It is incontrovertible, that the Jewish nation posses- 
sed the Scriptures of the Old Testament, for centuries 
before the coming of Christ. These Scriptures con- 


tained their laws, their history, and their religion. In | 


them, they were taught to look for a Redeemer, whose 
character was portrayed distinctly by the prophets ; 
his birth, his wondrous works, his death,—were all set 
forth with astonishing minuteness ; and in consequence 
of these predictions, the Jewish people looked confi- 
dently for their Messiah, about the time when he 
actually came. . A 

Thus far, the general expectation seems to have been 
favorable to a delusion. We grant that all men easily 
believe what they wish to be true; and therefore, the 
belief of the Apostles and first disciples that Christ 
was soon to come and perform wonderful works among 
them, might assist in producing a deception. But 
along with this expectation of the Messiah, we must 
remember that they had formed a view of his character, 
which totally differed from the outward claims of Jesus 
of Nazareth. Understanding the prophets to speak of 
earthly things, when they described, in such magnifi- 
cent language, the glory and triumph of the Messiah’s 
kingdom, they looked for a mighty Prince, a war-like 
conqueror, who should break the yoke of the Romans 
from their neck, and raise them to a still greater height 
of political eminence, than their nation had enjoyed 
in the days of David and Solomon. Manifestly then, 
although they were prepared to expect the Messiah, 
yet they were also prepared to see a man, as opposite 
as possible in his appearance and pretensions, to the 
humble Prophet of Galilee. By necessary consequence, 
the utmost incredulity towards his claims, might have 


Ses 
‘ ¥ 


ah ery 


33 


been anticipated, in the great body of the nation ; 
since all would be disposed to deny, that the reputed 
son of the carpenter Joseph, a man without education, 
or rank, or dignity, or connexion, could possibly be the 
promised King of Israel, the great and glorious Messiah 
of God. 

Under these circumstances, nevertheless, Christ 
calls upon them to believe in, and acknowledge him, 
upon the express strength of his fulfilment of prophe- 
ey, and the performance of such miracles as none but 
the Almighty could effect. The claim set up by him, 
as we might naturally expect, drew upon him the 
immediate observation of all men. ‘The priests, the 
Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Herodians,—all took an 
active interest in this great question; and after long 
and strict scrutiny into his pretensions, they divided 
into two classes,—those who rejected, and those who 
acknowledged him. But about the fact into which we 
are now enquiring, they all agreed; namely, that the 


_ wonderful works were actually done. No man denied 


that. Even the bitterest enemies of the Redeemer 
were forced to acknowledge, that signs and miracles 
had been effected by him, which they could not ac- 
count for in any other way, than by attributing them 
to the agency of the devil. So well was this under- 
stood, that Pilate the Roman Governor, feared when 
he was told that his prisoner was the Son of God, 
instead of treating him as an impostor; and Herod 
himself, though his avowed enemy, yet hoped to see 
some miracle done by him, as soon as he found him in 
his power. We lay down this assertion, therefore, as 
indisputable, that Christ Jesus was universally admitted 


to be a worker of wonders, altogether beyond the 


34 


reach of man. His enemies indeed, evaded the force 
of the argument, by absurdly and wickedly attributing 
those wonders to Satan. The writers of the Gospel 
history rightly attributed them to God. But the facts 
were not to be disputed ; and hence we draw our first 
conclusion, that in the works performed by the Saviour, 
there could have been no deception. 

It may be objected here, however, that if the whole 
body of the Jews believed that our Lord actually did 
these miracles, they must perforce, have acknowledged 
his divine character and mission. But this is drawing 
a very positive inference, from at least very doubtful 
premises. We have already adverted to the great 
disappointment, which the Priesthood and the leading 
men of the nation experienced, in seeing a Messiah, 
poor, humble, and unpretending in his earthly condi- 
tion, instead of their expected Prince and conqueror. 
Add to this, the extravagant ideas common in all ages, 
of the power of evil spirits; which led them to 
suppose that the instrumentality of the devil accounted 
sufficiently for all the miracles. Add to these two 
considerations, the anger and resentment kindled in 
‘their proud and selfish hearts, by the stern rebukes 
and reiterated charges of Hy ponte and wickedness 
which our Lord publicly made against them ; and it 
is easy to see how readily they might close their eyes 
and ears, as they actually did, so that no works, how- 
ever vast,—no doctrine, however pure,—no life, 
however holy,—should command their confidence, or 
subdue their wilful and stubborn opposition. 

But there is another, and very obvious reason, hy 
the Apostles could not have been deceived, seried 
from the quality of the works done by the Relcence 


35 


He read their thoughts; he cast out evil spirits ; he 
restored the blind, the lame, the deaf; be healed the 
palsy and the leprosy ; the most terrific cases of 
madness and insanity were completely cured ; and all 
this in multitudes, without a single failure, by a word, 
or a touch. How could there be deception here ? 
An instance or two may now and then occur, where 
marvellous cures are said to have been effected by 
the force of imagination, in certain diseases. But to 
do this for years,—publicly,—on crowds,—to do it in 
eases which are so totally beyond the reach of human 
means, and so totally independent of the power of im- 
agination, as the palsy,—the leprosy,—the withered 
arm,—the raving lunatic,—the born blind ;—such a 
deception may be safely pronounced totally impossible 
in its own nature. 

But even if imposture had been practicable in this 
class of our Saviour’s miracles, what shall be said of 
his twice feeding many thousands, with a few loaves 
and fishes, and having baskets full of fragments re- 
maining after the multitudes had been filled? What 
shall be said of his walking on the waves in presence 
of all the Apostles, and enabling Peter to do the same, — 
until his faith began to fail? What shall be said of 
his rebuking the raging storm, and saying to the fu- 
rious billows, ‘ Peace be still’—when alli his disciples 
in the ship with him, heard the high command, and 
saw the immediate calm that followed it? What shall 
be said of his calling the dead to life ? first the daugh- 
ter of Jairus, then the widow’s son, whom they were 
carrying out of the gate of the city in open day, and 
thirdly, Lazarus, before a crowd of witnesses, when 
he had already lain four days in the grave, bound hand 


36 


and foot, covered with a stone, and even dissolving 
in decay ?, How is it possible to think that the Evan- 
gelists and Apostles could have been deceived into the 
Opinion that such wonders had been effected? They 
were slow of belief,—disposed to doubt,—by no means 
easily persuaded. Their Master was surrounded by 
spies who observed his every action with jealousy and 
dislike ; and utterly inconceivable is it, that his dis- 
ciples could ever have been persuaded to credit these 
marvellous works, if the least imaginable shade of 
suspicion could have attached to them. 

Let it, however, be recollected in the next place, 
that there was no motive for such a deception, even 
had it been possible. What had our Lord to gain by 
imposition? What did he promise himself? Did he 
desire to take advantage of the first enthusiasm which 
his wonderful works excited among the people? So far 
from it, that when they sought to take him by force 
and make him aking, he hid himself to avoid it. Nay, 
he expressly and repeatedly told his followers, that he 
was to be given up to the Gentiles, and to be spitefully 
entreated and crucified. While he lived, he voluntarily 
endured persecution and want. ‘The foxes had holes, 
and the birds of the air had nests, but the Son of man 
had not where to lay his head: and the time was at 
hand, when he expected to lay down his life for our 
ruined world, according to his own express prediction. 
For what, then, should he deceive, even had it been 
possible? And was there ever a supposition so mon- 
strous as this, that a Being suchas Christ, should have 
taught and lived on such a system of purity, and benev- 
olence, and voluntary humiliation, and have closed 
his career with the agonies of such a martyrdom, and 


37 


yet have desired to deceive the little band of followers 
who adhered to him. . 

There is one consideration more, belonging to this 
branch of our subject. It is this. Even if it were 
possible that our Lord could have imposed upon the 
Apostles and Evangelists, by pretending to perform 
these stupendous and public miracles, without the 
power,—even if it were possible that he would have 
done so, for the avowed purpose of being a persecu- 
ted wanderer whilst living, and of ending his days as 
a malefactor upon the Cross,—yet here, at least, his 
deception must have ceased. A dead man cannot 
deceive the most credulous. What, then, shall we 
say, when the moment of his death displayed the 
greatest wonder of all? When the sun grew black, 
and the rocks rent, and there was a great earthquake, 
and many bodies of the dead arose and appeared 
unto many,—when the heathen centurion himself, 
exclaimed, in the terror of conviction, ‘Truly this was 
the Son of God!” What, above all, shall we say, when 
we find these same Evangelists and Apostles, with | 
five hundred brethren of whom St. Paul speaks, 
convinced against their will, that their Master had 
risen from the dead the third day, according to his 
own prediction,—had taught them, on several occa- 
sions, during forty days, and had then openly, in sight 
of them all, ascended up into heaven? These won- 
ders, exhibited after his death, destroy all the force 
of the objection to the miracles exhibited during his 
life-time ; and the whole, taken together, amounts to 
a stronger demonstration than any other question of 
evidence ever claimed, that the Evangelists and Apos- 


tles could not have been deceived, as to the facts of 
4 


38 


their histories,—that any imposture, practised on them, 
must have been totally and absolutely impossible. 

But then, the unbeliever adopts the other branch of 
opposition. These men, if not deceived, were per- 
haps deceivers. If they were not imposed upon, yet 
they may have been impostors. Let us now try this 
allegation, in the same way and on the same principles. 

In the Gospel histories, it is recorded by four dis- 
tinct authors, that Christ conferred a certain portion 
of miraculous power upon his Apostles, during his life 
time, and promised that they should do works like his 
own, after his decease. And after his death and res- 
urrection, and just before his ascension into heaven, 
he is stated to have directed that they should tarry at 
Jerusalem, until they should be endued with power 
from on high. Then, in the book of the Acts of the 
Apostles, we have a detailed account of the first dis- 
play of the Apostles’ miraculous gifts on the day of 
Pentecost, when they all spake in languages which 
they had never learned, and a vast concourse of Jews 
and strangers assembled and listened in perfect aston- 
ishment, and the result of that one day’s display was 
the conversion of three thousand souls! 

But this is nof all. The Apostles now boldly an- 
nounce the truth of Christ’s character and resurrection. 
They claim and exercise the same miraculous powers. 
Peter and Paul each restore the dead to life. They 
all heal diseases, expel evil spirits, and confer the 
gift of tongues and prophecy on others, by laying on of 
their hands. In all the Epistles of St. Paul, addres- 
sed to the various Churches, he adverts to those mi- 
raculous powers, calls them the signs of his Apostleship, 
and appeals to these thousands of believers as witnes- 


PUR 


ween Se 


= 


39 


ses of his truth. St. Peter’s Epistles recognize and 
confirm St. Paul’s, and also furnish an independent 
evidence of the same system. And how, we ask, 
could deception, under such circumstances, have been 
possible? The powers claimed by the Apostles were 
miraculous, public, and manifest ;—they were of a 
nature which precluded the slightest hope of decep- 
tion ;—and they were surrounded by enemies full 
of hatred and distrust: and yet it was by these very 
miracles that they produced conviction upon thousands, 
férmed congregations in Judea and amongst the Gen- 
tiles, and succeeded, in spite of the bitterest opposi- 
tion. How could these men have thus succeeded, if 
they were deficient in honesty and truth ; if, in point 
of fact, the powers which they professed to exercise, 
were falsely assumed for the purpose of imposture ? 
But, in the second place, even granting that it had 
been possible for the Apostles to deceive the thousands 
whom they converted to the faith of the Gospel, for 
what earthly inducement should they have attempted 
it? They all knew what the fate of their Master had _ 
been. They all knew that he promised them nothing, 
in this world, but hatred and persecution. They all 
looked forward to suffering, and shame, and_ final 
martyrdom. In the very infancy of the Church at 
Jerusalem, St. Stephen was stoned—St. Peter was 
imprisoned and beaten—St. James was slain by Herod. 
St. Paul relates a specimen of the general lot, when 
he writes to the Corinthians, that the Apostles were 
made the offscouring of all things, despised, defamed, 
and, so far as the present life was concerned, of all men 
most miserable. ‘Of the Jews,’ saith he, ‘five times 
received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten 


40 


with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered ship- 
wreck, a night anda day have I been in the deep, in 
journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of 
robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by 
the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wil- 
derness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false breth- 
ren, in weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in 
hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and naked- 
ness.’ The same Apostle, as we know from ecclesias- 
tical history, was beheaded,—St. Peter was crucified 
with his head downwards,—St. John was thrown into 
a caldron of boiling oil. What inducement had these 
men to persevere in a course of imposture, which 
brought them such earthly rewards as these? The 
idea truly, seems to us the very height of absurdity, 
that twelve men could be found, devoting themselves 
to the honor and glory of a crucified malefactor,— 
willingly exposing themselves to every danger and to 
the bitterest sufferings, and promising themselves 
nothing better than persecution and martyrdom,—sac- 
rificing ease, quiet, kindred, home,—and all this, for 
more than thirty years together, simply for the sake 
of deceiving mankind. Surely those who can believe 
that the Apostles were impostors, must possess an 
hundred fold more credulity, than the faith of the 
Christian demands. 

Yet this is not the whole of the difficulty, with 
which the unbeliever must contend. It remains to 
be shewn, how the thousands of Judea, and the tens 
of thousands in Asia Minor and in Rome, could be 
prevailed on to embrace the Gospel of Christ, if the 
Apostles had not actually manifested the miraculous 
powers which they claimed. What else but the exhi- _ 


= 


4] 


bition of such powers, could have enabled a little 
company of ignorant, uncultivated men, to convert 
multitudes, and that, too, at the peril of their own 
safety? For every disciple was in danger of perse- 
cution, as well as the Apostles themselves. Banish- 
ment, imprisonment, scourging, and death, were the 
common lot of all, during the ten persecutions which 
occurred before the end of the third century. Kivery 
prejudice of education, every tie of family affection, 
every motive of earthly interest, stood opposed to the 
adoption of the Christian name at that day. And yet 
the faith of Christ succeeded, and prospered, and grew, 
in spite of every obstacle. What but the firmest per- 
suasion, the fullest knowledge of its truth and power, 
could have strengthened and established the first pro- 
fessors of the system? What but the entire accordanee 
of the acts done, with the extraordinary powers claim- 
ed by the Apostles, could have invested a few illiterate 
fishermen with such abiding influence over the souls 
and bodies of mankind ? 

In the last place, we advert to a circumstance which 
seems to us decisive with every mind of feeling and 
of.candor. We have shewn that the Apostles could not 
have been deceived, by any possibility. Of course 
then, they must have been deceivers, or else their 
testimony was true. We have shewn that the nature 
of their claims was inconsistent with the possibility 
of imposition, and that every motive of interest, comfort, 
credit, and safety, combined to prevent the attempt at 
imposition, even had it been possible. But now we 
ask, were they such men as were likely to have deri- 


-yed any gratification from such an attempt ? Crimes 


never go alone. Vices, like virtues, are commonly 
4* | 


‘42 ee 


found in company. What was there in the doctrine or 
conduct of these men, that looked like a love of fraud ~ 
or deception? Was there ever framed, by the hand 
of mortal, such a pure, benevolent, candid, upright, 
peaceful, heavenly system of morality, as that which 
stands connected with the Gospel? Was there ever 
a company of men, who gave themselves up, with such 
unsparing self-devotior, to the teaching of virtue, as 
the Apostles of Christ? Was there ever a society of 
human beings, of any rank or condition, more clear 
from the slighest imputation on their moral character, 
or more unwearied in the establishment of truth, jus- 
tice, temperance, holiness, and charity, than they? 
And how then can they be suspected of desiring to 
deceive, even if they had the power? How can any 
one bear to fasten on such men, these foul and base 
imputations, without a shadow of plausible cause for 
suspicion? And where shall we look for truth, if not 
in the solemn declarations of men, whom every con- 
sideration in heaven and on earth,—every motive be- 
fore God and man—every argument of interest here, 
and of hope hereafter—every circumstance of ability 
and means, of opportunity and power, of principle 
and inclination,—alike pronounce incapable of desi- 
ring, and utterly unable to have executed, such an 
imposition. | 

It is in vain that the unbeliever tries to eseape from 
the conclusion, by vague and general declamations 
about the fallibility of human testimony. It is true, 
that human testimony is fallible; and yet, the whole 
of life is guided by it as certainly as if it were infalli- 
ble, under proper circumstances. The administration 
of justice, the acts of government, the declarations of 


al 43 


war, the restorations of peace, the voyages of the 


merchant, the experiments of philosophy, the progress 


of art and science, in a word, every thing on earth, is 
guided by human testimony ; and, instead of the gen- 
eral experience of mankind proving that human testi- 
mony deceives, the direct contrary is the fact. Human 
testimony rarely deceives, unless when distorted by 
prejudice, by passion, or by interest ; and never, since 
the earliest history of man, was there a case so fully 
exempted from such influence, as that of the Apostles. 

Neither does it bear upon the present question, that 
there have been many instances of false miracles, such 
as those met with in the history of heathenism, and 
the pious frauds of the Church of Rome. ‘True, there 
are such instances; but here is the distinction. The 
wonders recorded in heathenism, were not the proors 
of the system. They were never appealed to, as the 
evidence of a divine revelation. Nor in the case of 
the miracles so plentifully claimed by the Church of 
Rome, is there any connexion between them and the 
establishment of a new religion. None of their saints 
comes forward with the holy confidence of an Apostle, 
appealing to the congregations which he had convert- 
ed, for the truth of his miraculous powers. These mira- 
cles, like those of the heathen, came in long after the 
religion was settled. They were open to every possi- 
ble ground of suspicion. No man endured imprison- 
ment and martyrdom, in defence of their truth. No 
company of men in that church, ever went abroad, 


_ claiming such powers and openly exerting them in — 


presence of foes as well as friends. No man ever 
gave up his previous belief on account of them; and 
besides all this, their absolute falsehood has been ex- 


44 


posed, over and over again. Let the unbeliever try 
to draw a parallel between the false miracles which 
grew out of knavish dishonesty, practising its arts upon 
blind superstition, and the true miracles which were 
public, open, acknowledged by bitter enemies, ap- 
pealed to as the very ground of conviction, and believed 
in, notwithstanding the terrors of persecution, and the 
tortures of the most cruel death,—and he will confess, 
if candid, that no comparison can exist between them. 
The one class of actions displayed the power of God,— 
the other the juggling of man; the one was the tri- 
umphant appeal of truth,—the other was the dishon- 
est cloak of falsehood. The one built the Church 
of Christ in the face of bitter opposition,—the other 
broke its unity to pieces, and brought in a flood of 
confusion and impiety, upon the fold of the Redeemer. 
Here truly there is contrast enough, but no comparison. 

We conclude, then, by a recurrence to our first posi- 
tion. The Apostles and Evangelists who wrote the 
books of the New Testament, represent themselves, 
in the language of the text, as eyewitnesses of the life, 


miracles, death, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord 


Jesus Christ ; as well as of the subsequent events re- 
corded in the book of the Acts and the epistles. They 
could not have been deceived as to what they saw,— 
such deception was utterly impossible. Neither were 
they deceivers,—as totally impracticable was this im- 
posture as the other. The result is as sure as any 
inference can be,—the facts recorded in these sacred 
books must be true, absolutely and infallibly true. 
And the conviction founded upon these writings, is in 
no respect less, but in some respects more satisfactory 
than would be derived from the evidence of our 


Oi hey? oe an vad 


45 


senses. This position—strange as it may seem,— 
together with a view of the reasonableness of the mode 
in which it has pleased God to display his revelation 
to us, will form the subject of our next discourse. 
Meanwhile, my beloved brethren, we may not trespass 
longer on your attention, than to remind you, that all 
the wonders of the life of Christ, and all the love and 
mercy of his sufferings and death, and all the labors, 
miracles, self denial, and martyrdom of his Apostles, 
will avail nothing but to deepen our condemnation, 
unless our faith be genuine, heartfelt, and sincere. 
What profits it that we should confess the Redeemer 
with our lips, if, in our conduct, we deny him? What 
argument can be expected to prevail with the unbe- 
liever, who is soured and disgusted with the living 
examples of Christianity? May the blessed influence 


of the Holy Spirit enable us all to furnish that practical 
_ comment upon the Word of God, which may best pro- 


mote the extension of pure and undefiled religion. 


May we be defenders of the truth, not only in specu- 


lation, but in performance, that so, walking in the steps 
of the primitive disciples, and manifesting to all around 
us, the proper energy of a saving faith, we may be 
accepted, justified and sanctified, through the atone~ 
ment and merits of our only Lord and Saviour. 


DISCOURSE Iv. 


2 Cor. V. 20. 


Now THEN WE ARE AMBASSADORS FOR CHRIST, AS THOUGH GOD DID BESEECH 
YOU BY US. 


We have endeavored, my brethren, in our two last 
discourses, to shew, in a simple and condensed form, 
the authenticity and historical certainty of the books 
of the New Testament. And we design to consider 
the proofs of the Christian Revelation, which rest on 
the prophecies and the establishment of the Church, 
together with the principal objections of infidelity, 
before: we close our course. But we have promised 
that on the present occasion, we should examine a 
difficulty, which not only meets usin the works of 
our avowed adversaries, but also in the language of 
every heart at times,—namely, the question, why the 
Almighty should choose to commit his truth to books, 
and make men his messengers to men, instead of 
revealing himself plainly and directly to every indi- 
vidual. ) 

The eloquent infidel, Rousseau, has put this difficulty 
into a striking form, which we shall present to you, on 
the fairest principle of argument, in his own words. 
‘If God has spoken,’ says this subtle sophist, ‘why 
have I heard nothing of it? I would rather have heard 


47 


God himself speaking, than listen to men speaking in 
his name. It would cost him no more, and I should 
be secure from error. The wonders by which his 
messengers were accredited are only in books. These 
books were made by men; I have nothing better for 
the whole than human testimony. Men report to me 
what other men have reported. How many men be- 
tween God and me! But nevertheless, you ask me 
to examine—to compare—to verify. O! if God had 
deigned to dispense with all this labor, should I have 
served him with less sincerity of heart ??* 

Now this isa kind of sophistry, which has its sole 
origin in pride and presumption. An humble, docile 
spirit was never yet affected by it. Still, the adversary 
of our souls makes such extensive use of it, and it 
carries on its face so much plausibility to the careless 
mind, that we wish to demonstrate its utter futility, 
before we proceed to the ultimate topics of our un- 
dertaking. 

And here let me be distinctly understood as appeal- 
ing to reason, and to reason alone. On the principles 
of reason we assert the objection to be absurd and 
unphilosophical. The Christian, indeed, has a shorter 
and a better argument. He has a spiritual witness 
within him—the consciousness of a living faith—that 
the Scriptures are the wisdom of God. But this is an 
argument only to the Christian. To the skeptical, the 
unconvinced—the doubting mind, human reason is the 
only tribunal, because he acknowledges no other. Let 
this reason then,—the blessed gift of God, be honestly 
exercised, and not until it has done its office will we 
ask such minds to appeal to faith. 
ee Ee ek 

Emile. 4, B. p. 213. 


48 


But in order to put the question in its true light, let 
us enquire, what is the Christian system? It is the 
offer of pardon from God, the eternal Sovereign, to a 
guilty world. To make this offer, the Son of God 
descends on earth, assumes our nature, declares the 
conditions of redemption, renders a full atonement to 
the offended justice of heaven, rises from the tomb, 
- appoints his Ambassadors, promises them the seal of 
their commission in the power of working miracles, 
and ascends to heaven. Through their instrumentality, 
he establishes his Church among all nations: and 
when the whole is settled into a regular and abiding 
form, the offered pardon is proclaimed by the appoint- 
ed ministers of reconciliation, and the recorded histo- 
ry of the facts, by the eyewitnesses themselves, iS ap- 
pealed to, as to the truth of God. Now the unbeliever 
asks, Why, if the Lord has once appeared on earth, he 
does not appear always? If miracles were at one 
period performed to attest the truth, why are they not 
performed still? If God has once spoken directly to 
any of his creatures, why does he notstill speak direct- 
ly to every one? And if the King of heaven has a 
message of mercy to deliver, why does he send human 
méssengers with that message, instead of carrying it 
himself? Alas! who that felt as he ought, the con- 
demnation due to his transgressions, would think of 
such questions as these ?. What criminal under sentence 
of death, ever refused to accept the record of his 
pardon, because the Governor did not condescend to 
deliver it with his ownhand? . 

But let us examine the reasonableness of the al- 
leged difficulty. And first, I presume it will be 
eranted, that all men stand in need of two things,—a 


49 


knowledge of the will of God, and forgiveness when 
they have transgressed it. To suppose that the Creator 
made us what we are—endowed us with such sublime 
and comprehensive faculties—gave us passions which 
require so much regulation and restraint—and placed 
us in a cirele of such varied social duties—and yet 
that he cares nothing about the course of conduct which 
we pursue, and has no,will whether we be virtuous and 
happy, or vicious and miserable,—this notion is so 
utterly irrational, that the very idiot might be ashamed 
of it. Infinitely more probable is it, that the Creator 
does care for his own work, and does will the virtue 
and happiness of his creatures. Now then, as it is 
reasonable that our Maker has such a will concerning 
us, and as it is incontrovertible that he must know, far 
better than we can, what will render us happy, it is 
plain that he would be likely to inform us—to give us 
rales, to establish laws for our guidance, and thus, in 
his infinite benevolence, to make the same provision 
for our moral and spiritual, that we see he has made 
for our bodily welfare. 

But. again; we are all conscious of sin. We all 
know that we have violated, times without number, 
even our own rules of morality. We all feel that a pure 
and holy Being, such as the Deist acknowledges God 
to be, cannot look on our lives without condemning a 
vast deal that he beholds there. Consequently we are 
obliged to confess that we have offended him on occa- 
sions innumerable, for who can reckon his open trans- 
gressions, much less his secret faults? Here then, arises 
our need of forgiveness; and, of course, whether God 
will forgive, and on what conditions, are questions 
demanding a revelation again. On these two points 

5 : 


50 


therefore, first, the will of our Creator concerning our 
moral and spiritual conduct, which is the law of God,— 
and secondly, his will that we may be pardoned, and 
the mode how, when we have violated his commands, 
which is the Gospel—we stand in absolute need of 
express information. Our reason cannot guide us in 
such enquiries as these without a positive declaration 
of the Divine will. We may imagine, as we please, 
what course of conduct will commend us to the favor 
of the Eternal; but is it reasonable to think that the 
Almighty would leave us to wander, amidst doubts and 
difficulties, the sport of our passions and desires, when, 
by a revelation of his will, he could furnish us with a 
plain and unerring guide ? We may imagine, as we 
please, that the Deity will’pardon our transgressions ; 
but is it reasonable to think that he would leave us to 
the alternate dangers of presumption and despair, dis- 
tracted between hope and fear, ignorant and bewildered 
with regard to what most concerned us, when, by a 
revelation of his purpose, he could give us a sure 
directory, and set our hearts at rest ? Manifestly then, 
we stand in need of a revelation, and it is reasonable 
to believe,—yea it seems absurd not to believe—that 
a benevolent God would grant it to us. i" 

The next question is, how such a revelation should 
be made, according to the views of enlightened reason. 
And this we may venture to answer by asking how it 
could be made? God is the pure and holy Creator,— 
man is the sinful ereature; God isa Spirit,—man is 
flesh; God is without passions, without weakness, 
without infirmity,—man is the slave of his appetites, 
driven to and fro by every impulse of his nature. 
How could the communication be opened between 


51 


them? Is it not perfectly plain that God must descend 
to us—accommodate himself to our condition—speak 
to us in the words of earth—explain himself as man 
to man—for otherwise, how could we understand him 
at all? What do we know of the language of heaven, 
or of the modes and usuages of the spiritual world? 
How simple then, is it to conceive, that there never 
could have been any revelation from the Deity, unless 
God had graciously condescended to come to our level, 
and address us in our own way? And is not this pre- 
cisely what he has done in the numerous personal 
appearances related in the Old Testament, especially 
in the manifestation of his mercy in the person of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, as recorded in the New, and in the 
various ambassadors, the Prophets and Apostles, com- 
missioned to be his agents to mankind ? 

We see then, thus far, that the very necessity of the 


" ease seems to demand the first principle of revelation, 


viz. that God should speak to us as man; and the second 
is equally plain. For how should mankind know, that 
the Being, who thus held intercourse with them, was 
indeed Divine, or divinely commissioned ? How should 
they know that the voice which spoke to them in the 
language of earth, was indeed the voice of a Superior 
Intelligence—the voice of God, or of an ambassador 
from him ? Why manifestly, in one way only, namely, 
by the connecting with the revelation, some exhibition 
of superhuman power ; in other words, by miracles. 
These are the seals of Omnipotence to the senses of 
men. ‘These are the proofs which distinguished the 
words of Deity from the words of all mortal communi- 
cation. And by something of this nature alone, could 


- it have been demonstrated to our world, that God had 


indeed spoken. 


ED PENDS Oe ae 


52 


We may readily see by this reflection, that the 
question of miracles is like the other, a question of 
necessity, not choice. Al! the works of God are won- 
derful; but they are all arranged according to a vast and 
harmonious system, which operates so smoothly and 
so constantly, with such beautiful regularity and order, 
that men forget the power which framed and supports 
the whole. Buta miracle is an interruption of the 
general laws of the Almighty ,—it is a violent exception 
to the general rule,—it is a temporary invasion of the’ 
general repose of nature. And nothing can be more 
absurd, in the eyes of reason, than to expect that the 
Almighty would be more profuse of such acts than the 
necessity of the case required. Some proofs of this 
description were indispensable to the confirmation of 
the fact, that God had spoken; and, like every thing 
else in his glorious and majestic system, even these 
proofs were lavished, at the proper periods, with a 
liberal and munificent hand. But there was a limit 
beyond which mankind could not reasonably ask them ; 
and when that limit was attained, the very preservation 
of our peace, and the cultivation of piety itself, requi- 
red that they should cease. 

Now this brings us to the point of difficulty proposed 
by the unbeliever. Why does not God make a distinet 
revelation to every individual man? Why does he 
not humor the petulance. and presumption of every 
arrogant caviller, by private communications and pri- 
vate miracles, merely to suit his particular case? Why,— 
to use the words of the infidel Rousseau, which I have 
already quoted,—why does not the Majesty of heaven 
save each single objector the trouble of examination 
and reflection, by the exhibition of some overwhelming 


53 


wonder, which should at once convince and convert 
him? And in order to understand what signs he would 
require, let us quote from the same author, another 
passage; where he presumes to find fault with the 
want of dignity, as he calls it, in the miracles per- 
formed by the Saviour. ; 

‘Let a man appear’ says this infidel philosopher, 
‘and hold this language to us. Mortals! I announce to 
you the will of the Supreme Being ; acknowledge, 
‘in my voice, the Sovereign who sends me. I order 
the sun to change ‘his course, the stars to form a 
different arrangement, the mountains to sink down 
into a plain, the waves to rise up, and the whole 
earth to take another aspect. At these wonders, who,’ 
continues he, ‘would not recognize, at the instant, 
the master of nature? But who shall dare to tell 
me how many eyewitnesses it requires to render a 
miracle worthy of faith? If your miracles, done for 
the purpose of proving your doctrine, stand in need 
themselves of being proved, of what use are they? 
as well might they never have been performed at all.’* 

Such is the argument of Rousseau, and this is the 
plan which he would recommend for the evidence 
of a divine revelation. Now then, let us bring the 
demands of this reasoner to the test of reason. To 
convince him that the Deity is actually addressing 
mankind in human form, or that he has authorised his 
special messengers to declare his will, it is not enough 
that the benevolent wonders of Christ and his Apos- 
tles should be wrought before the very eyes of this 
philosopher. Nay, it is not enough that the more 


*Emile. 4 B. p. 216. 
5* 


54 


striking miracles of the first revelation be executed, 
but all the universe must be thrown into confusion. 
The sun must change his course; the stars must 
desert their orbits; mountains must disappear; the 
sea must rise up ; and the whole earth take a different 
aspect. Then this sagacious dictator would conde- 
scend to believe. But it would not be sufficient to 
do this once, for the gratification of human incredulity. 
It would be necessary for the supposed Ambassador 
of God to make the same proelamation in every corner 
of the globe, and perform the same wonders at every 
repetition, because Rousseau tells us that human testi- 
mony is nothing, and therefore the allegation of one 
company who heard the prophet announce these 
miracles, and saw them done at his word, would 
have no influence on the next company who did 
not hear and see him. Of course, by this profound 
device, the Ambassador of God must go round the 
world, delivering the same message and exhibiting 
the same wonders to every new crowd, since none 
must venture to believe their neighbor, and every 
ear must hear, and every eye must see for itself. And 
so the sun and the stars must be continually changing, 
and the mountains and seas rising and falling, and the 
whole earth taking a new aspect without intermission. 
And if so, wHo couLD LIVE? Where were the business, 
and the feelings, and the system of human existence? 
Nay, where would be the whole universe, when suns 
and planets themselves, must be whirled in disorder, 
to please the wanton faney of incredulous men! 

But it would not even suffice, to have this tremen- 
dous display exhibited to one generation; because 
Rousseau, and along with him, David Hume, and all 


55 


the rest of our deistical philosophers, deny that any 
human testimony can prove a miracle. Therefore, 
even if one generation of men could live through the 
elemental war which he thinks reasonable in order to 
prove a revelation from God to man, their children 
would grow up at perfect liberty to deny the whole. 
They must not believe on the evidence of their fathers’ 
senses,—no ! they must see and hear for themselves. 
And therefore, very philosophically setting down 
their parents for knaves or fools, they demand a new 


Ambassador, who shall again proclaim his high com- 


mission, and again order the sun, and stars, and seas, 
and mountains, and the general aspect of the earth, to 
abandon their settled course, and destroy, for their 
whim, the whole system of nature! Now here, in 
sober detail, is the plan of the infidel’s devising, which 
he offers as an improvement upon the evidence of 
Christian truth. And if ever the brain of man con- 
ceived a wilder and more absurd idea, | acknowledge 
myself ignorant of the first principles of common 
sense. 

_ Granting however, that all men would not go te 
the same extent, yet who would, or who could live in 
a world, which was, in any degree, subject to be dis- 
turbed by the folly of incredulity, asking for signs ¢ 


- Hence we find the wisdom of Christ steadily refusing 
to gratify the infidels of Jerusalem. ‘An evil and 


adulterous generation’ saith he, ‘seeketh after a sign.’ 
And although he did signs and wonders to testify the 
truth of hiserevelation, yet he did them, not to please 
the caprice of his enemies, but according to his own 
divine discretion, and at the supplication of his friends. 
Therefore no man was injured by the miracles of 


56 


the Gospel. No interruption was given to the regular 
system of things. Nor was the universe thrown into 
confusion to suit the arrogant dictation of philosophers, 
who wanted to be convinced against their will, and 


to be saved the trouble, forsooth, of an impartial ex- 
amination, ' 7 


This may suffice to shew the utter absurdity of the 


idea, that human Sagacity could point out a better plan: 


for the evidence of a divine revelation than that which 
it has pleased God to execute. But when this revela- 


tion was made, why should it not be recorded by those . 


who were ear-witnesses of. the doctrine, and eye- 
witnesses of the facts ? And why should not the books 
thus written, be a sufficient testimony to other gene- 
rations? For it is evident, that this revelation must 
either be constantly renewed to each successive race 


ay 


of men, or else be committed to the treacherous keep- 


ing of human memory, or else be, as it has been, 
recorded in a tangible form for the study and benefit 
of all. We ask reason to say which is the more rea- 
sonable mode of preserving and transmitting the intel- 


ligence, especially when this is connected with an ° 


order of men, devoted to the propagation of its truths. 
All facts are treasured up in writing,—why should not 
these? All laws of earthly governments are written,— 
why should not the law of heaven? All proclamations 
and declarations of pardon are written,—why should 
not the Gospel of divine forgiveness? All truth, all 
science, all wisdom amongst men, is sought in books,—. 
and why should not the truth, the science, and the wis- 
dom, of the Lord’s own bestowing, be laid up in this— 
the best human depository,—the safest and the surest 
form of earthly preservation? We have already shewn 


57 
the necessity by which the revelation of God to man 
was given through human language, because we could 
understand no other; and as plain does it seem to my 
mind, that the recording of this revelation in a book, 
was equally ‘necessary, since we could not study it so 
beneficially in any other mode. Doctrines addressed 
to the ear alone, are transient and liable to be misun- 
derstood. They may impress deeply for the moment, 
but are apt soon to fly away. Put in writing, however, 
we can learn them thoroughly, meditate upon, and 


commit them to our memories and our hearts, so as to 


imbue our whole minds and spirits with them, and 
incorporate them into the very substance of our 
thoughts and feelings. When we remember therefore, 
the proper design of a revelation, viz. to teach us the 
law of God, and the conditions of forgiveness, SO as 
to make them the leading motives of our lives, how 
strange that infidelity’ should object to the very form, 
which is manifestly the best, if not the only one, 
adapted to the condition of human nature 

But it may be asked, whether it would not be better — 
that God should still, in all ages of the Church, continue 
the standing evidence of miracles, to help the doubting 
and the wavering to acknowledge his Scriptures of 
truth? To this, we answer in the negative. We have 
already said, that the preservation of our peace, and 
the cultivation of our piety, require that miracles should 
cease, when they have done their office of proving, 


ii ee ' 
in-the first instance, a revelation of God to man. The 


history of the Church shews, that divine truth, once 


established and recorded, no longer needs them; and, 


if not needed, they would seem to be injurious, since 
it is plain that an age of miracles must be a period of 


58 

anxiety and perturbation. We are so constituted, that 
every deviation from the common course of things 
agitates and confounds us... The faculties are disturb- 
ed—business is suspended—duties overlooked—labors 
forgotten. Only let us imagine what an effect would 
be produced in our day, by the exhibition of any of 
those wonders recorded in the acts of the Apostles. 
What crowds would throng together to behold them— 
what inevitable mischief and confusion must ensue, 
through the neglect of the quiet, steady operations of 
social life—what contempt of the ordinary means of 
health and comfort, through an idle reliance on the 
ministers of God—and how a vain and wandering 
curiosity would usurp the place of diligence and virtue. 
Such a state of things, in the view of enlightened 
reason, ought to be temporary, in compassion to the 
very weakness of man. And therefore, it would seem 
to usa most just inference from the wisdom and benev- 
olence of God, that when they had fully, performed 
their office of establishing the revealed will of heaven, 
miracles must cease. } 

If, however, notwithstanding this reflection, the 
thought of the infidel should at any time glance across 
the mind of the believer, ‘Why have I not seen some 
of these wondrous things,—Why has not God spoken to 
me also ?? let reason reprove the folly of such a desire, 
by calling to remembrance the effect of those awful 
revelations upon the best and holiest men that ever 
lived. The Prophet Daniel and the Apostle John 
both record their feelings, when addressed in this 
supernatural manner. They fainted—they fell down 
as dead, and could not listen till they were strength- 
ened by superior power. In the book of Job, we have 


59 


one of the lighter impressions made by these com- 
munications. ‘In thoughts from the visions of the 
night,’ saith Eliphaz, ‘ when deep sleep falleth on men, 
fear came upon me and. trembling, which’ made all 
my bones to shake. Then a spirit passed before my 
face, the hair of my flesh stood up. It stood still, but 
I could not discern the form thereof; an image was 
before mine eyes, there was silence, and I heard a 
voice saying, Shall mortal man be more just than God; 
shall a man be more pure than his Maker ?? Such was 
the inevitable terror accompanying these superhuman 
communications, that all the Prophets seem to have 
dreaded their office, instead of desiring it. True, the 
particulars of their feelings are not always given in 
Scriptures, but when they are given, we find them of 
the very kind which reason itself dictates. For let us 
remember, how the least suspicion of any thing super- 
natural, excites and depresses us all. How few men 
ean bear to be long alone, even witha dead body. 
How few men could endure to hold conversation with 
an invisible spirit. Do we not all know that many have 
gone mad with fear from only imagining that they had 
seen a spectre? And let the firmest hearts that ever 
beat in mortal bosom, live in daily and hourly expect- 
ation that a voice from heaven might strike upon their 
ear,—let them be subject to have their sleep broken 
by unearthly sounds and apparitions declaring the 
revelation of the Most High,—let them be set forth to 
mankind as the Prophets and Apostles,—the appointed 


recipients of the Divine will,—in the midst of trem- 


bling and fainting, and burning excitement, and un- 
natural impulses, which strained every nerve and 


- faculty to their highest tension,—let the boldest and 


60 


bravest I say, once endure these inevitable results of 
the Divine communications, and they would be glad 
to escape from so terrible a distinction. Such is the 
effect of human depravity—such the awful consequen- 
ces of sin—such our inherent weakness,—that we 
cannot bear a direct sensible manifestation of the 
presence of the Deity. And these, let it be marked, 
were the effects with the best of men,—with the faith- 
ful, the holy, the humble worshippers of the living 
and true God,—with those to whom the Almighty 
might be supposed to manifest his sensible presence 
in the gentlest possible way. But what if the arrogant 
spirit of the infidel should have its desire >? What if 
the proud and stubborn temper of objection and defi- 
ance, which dictates to the Eternal and Omnipotent 
Creator, how and to whom his revelations should be 
made, were gratified? What might such expect,—if 
indeed the voice of God should strike upon their Gary - 
but instant destruction. QO! fools and mad,—to. talk 
so lightly and so boldly of what they will not under- 
stand. Even reason might tell them, that it must be 
a fearful thing to listen, with mortal ear, to the voice 
of the Almighty. Even reason, which has often fled 
in terror from her throne, when only the voice of a 
disembodied spirit has been thought to have addressed 
it, would shrink and recoil from parleying with the 
Father of spirits, in utter dismay. : 

No ! blessed be the mercy and. compassion of the 
Lord, which, in pity to our weakness, spares us such a 
shock, as an immediate revelation to our senses must 
inevitably be to all, so long as we are in the flesh, 
occupying this fallen world, surrounded by infirmity. 
Blessed be his wisdom and goodness, which has in 


ie 


61 


general confined those manifestations to the Prophets 
and Apostles, men raised up and strengthened super- 
naturally, for their sublime but awful work ; while the 
rest of mankind have beer invited to contemplate his 
truth and love, in quietness and peace, without distrac- 
tion or terror. Thrice only, has the Almighty depart- 
ed from the general rule, as if to shew us, the more 
clearly, the necessity of its adoption. Once, when he 
spake amidst the thunders of Sinai, and the Israelites, 
though standing in crowds, and previously sanctified, 
yet trembled and quaked, and begged Moses to ask 
that ‘the Lord might speak no more unto them, or they 
would die.’ The second, when the manifestation at-. 
tested the dignity of Christ on the banks of Jordan ; 
and the third, when in answer to the Saviour’s prayer, 
that the Father would glorify his name, it was pro- 
claimed from heaven, ,“1 have both glorified it, and 
will glorify it again.’ The assembled crowd that 
listened to these few words, were struck with awe, 
for ‘some said it thundered, and others that an angel 
had spoken unto him.’ Manifestly therefore, the effect 
of such things is too terrific, for the proper purposes 
of a general revelation. And hence, in nothing have 
we more reason to bless the goodness of God, than in 
this very peculiarity, that while, at the declaration of 
his will from time to time, as the world required and 
could bear it,—wonders and miracles accompanied it, 
more than enough to convince the most incredulous, if 
their hearts had not been opposed to the truth,—yet 
for the general use, a record was made,—proved,— 
guarded,—witnessed by a flood of testimony, but asking 
nothing at our hands, beyond a teachable and docile 


mind; surrounded by no terrors,—attended by no 
6 


62 


supernatural dread,—but commending itself to every 
candid searcher, by its purity, its sublime simplicity, 
its benevolence, its love, its surpassing tenderness to 
the best interests of sinful men, in time and in eter- 
nity. i) 

But the unbeliever wants a revelation that shall save 
him the trouble of examining. And wherefore should 
the Lord gratify the criminal carelessness of such a 
desire? Do we not know that every pursuit in life 
requires trouble? Do we not know that it is even 
necessary, for our own good, that we should make our 
acquisitions of every kind, with effort and with toil? 
Who values that for which he has not labored ? 
Who economises the wealth which he has not earned ? 
Who cares for the knowledge which has cost him no- 
thing? And how dare any mortal man shew his willing- 
ness to apply his powers to every branch of human 
learning, and yet impiously ask that the God of heaven 
Shall save him the trouble of examining where the 
truth of his revelation is concerned, and so construct 
it as to relieve him from the pains of searching and 
reflecting for himself in that pursuit, which is better 
worth the toil than all other science put together ? 
Alas! how the pride of philosophy must have intoxi- 
cated his brain, when a man like Rousseau, could 
publish so absurd an objection! And how fully is the 
saying of the Scripture justified when it declares, that 
‘the Lord taketh the wise in their own craftiness, that 
he knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are 
vain. | | 

Thanks then, my brethren, be to the Eternal and Su- 
preme, the Only Wise God, for the modes of evidence 
which demonstrate the sanctity of the Scriptures. 


63 


Thanks be to him, that while the proofs of their 
divine origin are so abundant, that no humble 
searcher after truth can doubt, they are not calculated 
to force or terrify,—to overwhelm, or to constrain. 
Thanks be to him, that while, on the first promulgation 
of his will from heaven, wonders accompanied it as 
the seal of its authority, yet that as soon as their proper 
office was accomplished, miracles appaered no more. 
Still, however, there is a kind of revelation, which 
‘the Spirit of God, through Christ Jesus, makes to every 
faithful seeker. ‘ Not an outward revelation to the 
senses, but an inward revelation to the heart. Not 
in distinct words or voices, but in the gentle, and 
insensible, though precious influences, which purify 
and enlighten, and console. ‘If any man will do his 
will, he shall know of the doctrine,’ by that species 
of continued miracle, which after all, is the most per- 
suasive evidence of the Gospel—the conversion and 
sanctification of the sinner. In that mighty change, 
every Christian becomes a direct and living witness 
of the truth of God, and an instrument to win others, 
in turn, that they, too, may seek the blessings of sal- 
vation. : . 
May the Lord grant us all, "grace to perceive the 
perfect wisdom displayed in every part of the system 
of Redemption. May we look down with pity on the 
futile objections of the unbeliever, who’ blindly cen- 
sures what is best entitled to his praise. And while 
we take the sacred record of divine truth, as a light 
to our feet and a lamp to our paths, may we all be 
enabled to follow our Leader and our Guide to that 
world, where we shall ‘see face to face, and know 
even as we are known,’—where sin and infirmity will 


64 


no longer be barriers to the full communion with God ; 
—where we shall hear him without apprehension— 
behold him without fear—and rejoice in the unclouded 
manifestation of his glory, for evermore! 


DISCOURSE V. 


Tsaran, XLI. 23. 


SHEW THE THINGS THAT ARE TO COME HEREAFTER, THAT WE MAY KNOW THAT 
YE ARE GODS. 


Att men will agree, my brethren, that one of the 


peculiar attributes of Deity, is foreknowledge ; that is, 


the full power of. surveying all things before they 
come to pass, and before there are any circumstances 
existing which can necessarily give rise to them. No 
knowledge of this description is within the compass of 
our intellect. We can indeed conjecture what may 
happen; and in many instances, experienced men, 
reflecting on what has been, and reasoning on the 
present condition of things, may imagine, very nearly, 
what is likely to happen again. But nothing of this 
kind can be called foreknowledge, because it is utterly 
uncertain. The power to declare positively what a 


single day shall bring forth, belongs not to man; since 


even the wisest and most profound thinkers are contin- 
ually surprised by the unexpected turns of human 
affairs, and that too, in the familiar and everyday con- 
cerns of mortality. Manifestly then, the ability to 
deliver predictions, or to foretell accurately what is to 
come to pass, can only be possessed and communicated 


by the Eternal and Supreme Being, whose knowledge 
‘is as boundless as his power. 


6* 


66 


We may therefore, lay it down, as an incontrovertible 
principle, that predictions of future events, which are 
commonly called prophecies, do clearly establish the 
fact of a divine revelation; and hence we arrive at the 
second great proof of the Christian system. Of the 
first, viz. miracles, we have already treated ; and 
prophecy is not one jot inferior to miracles, but rather 
superior ; since, when rightly considered, it stands in 
place of a continued miracle, and increases in the 
strength of its testimony with the lapse of time. 

In order to consider how this branch of evidence 
bears upon the Christian system, it will be necessary to 
remember that the Jewish and the Christian religions 
are in substance one. The design of God from the pe- 
riod of the fall, was the same, viz. the salvation of 
mankind through the appointed Redeemer. The first 
prophecy on record foretold that ‘ the seed of the woman 
should bruise the serpent’s head,’ and the various dis- 
pensations, predictions, and, ordinances of the Old 
Testament, all pointed to the consummation which 
Christ should in due time effect, with more or less. 
clearness. Therefore Christianity is to be regarded, 
not as a distinct plan, but as the completing and per- 
fecting the Jewish system. And the prophecies are 
more especially to be viewed in this light, because it 
was the constant object of our great Redeemer to 
shew that not one tittle of the Old Testament Scrip- 
tures could pass away, until all were fulfilled. 

On these two pillars of superhuman testimony, 
miracles and prophecy,—the truth of God stands firm. 
We have shewn, in our last discourse, how necessary it 
was, on account of the very infirmity of our nature, that 
the Almighty should descend to our level in making his 


67 


revelation to us ; and that no man could bear a direct 
communication with the great Creator, unless he were 
strengthened by superior power. We have shewn that 
reason itself could devise no other mode of making 
this revelation, so beneficent and kind, and withal so 
effectual, as the employment of special instruments 
from our own race, who should act as the ambassadors 
of heaven, and who, at the same time, should prove 
their divine commission, not only by the general 
holiness and purity of their lives, and by their mar- 
tyrdom in support of their doctrine, but also by the per- 
formance of such wonders as nothing but Almighty 
power could display. We shewed also, as we trust, the 
utter absurdity of the scheme proposed by our most 
celebrated infidels, as an improvement on the mode in 
which a divine revelation should be made to man : and 
even inthis stage of the evidence, we might have 
challenged human ingenuity fairly to evade the con- 
clusion, that Christianity must be the truth of God. 
But the indulgence of heaven does not stop at this 
point of demonstration. By miracles the Lord gave 
testimony to his word, at the very periods in which 
his several revelations were first promulgated. And 
he condescended to give the evidence of prophecy 
to all future generations, as a further confirmation of 
his truth. In general, the same individuals who per- 
formed the miracles, pronounced the prophecies ; and 
the same Scriptures which record the wondrous acts, 
likewise record the equally wondrous predictions. 
What could the imagination of a reasonable man ask 
more, in order to authenticate the communications of 
the Most High, than a concurrence of things like these ? 
Nay, what more could the most audacious incredulity 


68 


say to the messengers of heaven than this,—Shew us 
miracles, and tell us what shall come to pass hereafter ' 
Both these demands are anticipated by the goodness of 
God. On both, the external proofs of his truths are 
mainly founded. And there is no other system of 
religion but that of the Bible, which lays claim to both in 
its very establishment, and which even defies the priests 
of idolatry,—as in the text,—to the trial of competition. 

The limits we have proposed to the present discourse, 
will not allow of an extensive notice of the prophecies; 
for this would require a volume. But we design to point 
out, first, their general plan; secondly, their variety ; 
thirdly, the reasons why, in general, the prophecies 
seem obscure ; fourthly, we shall shew a few instances 
of Scriptural predictions, together with their fulfilment ; 
and fifthly, we shall consider the doctrine of the sophis- 
tical advocates of infidelity, in reference to this branch 
of the evidences of the Christian system : and we 
pray you, my brethren, to grant us your best attention 5 
since no subject so fully deserves it, and none can so 
well repay you, as the earnest and candid examination 
of the wisdom and the truth of God. a 

1. The general plan of prophecy is,—like its bles- 
sed Author,—stupendous and magnificent in its whole 
range, commencing with the fall of our first parents, 
__tracing out, with marvellous precision, the means 
provided for the restoration of our race,—shewing the > 
destiny of all the principal nations of the earth, espe- 
cially of the chosen people—clearly vredicting the pro- 
cress of the Church, its corruptions, its calamities, and » 
its final prosperity,—and carrying forward its sublime 
predictions even to the end of the world, the judg- 
ment, the doom of everlasting woe, and the inheritance 


69 


of eternal glory. What human mind could dare to 
conceive so vast a compass? And how plainly the 
very immensity of such a plan, bears the impress of 
the Deity ! 

2. But secondly, the variety of the prophecies is as 
astonishing to the reflecting mind, as their extent. It 
is not a few isolated predictions, dispersed here and 
there amongst the fragments of antiquity, growing up 
into no system, and pointing to no important end: but 
it is a vast number of predictions, some of them re- 
lating to individuals ; some to nations, some to partic- 
ular results of particular courses of conduct, some 


- obscure, and others plain; but all connected with the 


great purpose of establishing the truth of God, the 
kingdom of Christ, and the regeneration of mankind, 
through the influence of pure religion. In this con- 
nexion the prophecies must always be viewed, if we 
would properly appreciate their value. Each single 
prediction, may seem comparatively unimportant by 
itself, like the links of a chain when severed from 
each other. But viewed in their connexion, they are 
seen to form one whole, worthy of the blessed object 
of their communications,—the reviving the hopes and 
confirming the faith of a ruined world. 

3. This brings us, however, in the third place, to 
consider the objection made to the prophecies,—that 
they are generally so obscure as to render it difficult, 
if not impossible, to be confident of their true inter- 
pretation. And in order that we may understand the 


force of this common allegation, we shall enquire what 


sort of clearness it would be reasonable to demand in 
such a subject. It is perfectly familiar to us all, that 
there is nothing to which we are more inclined than a 


70 


curious searching into futurity. The history of human 
superstition, in seeking for prophecies from divina- 
tion, magic, astrology, fortune telling, and dreams,— 
even down to the present day,—shews most clearly 
the danger to our own welfare of attempting to interfere 
with the sober regularity of life, beyond what is strictly 
necessary for great and important ends. Perhaps, how- 
ever, the simplest mode of proving this assertion is to 
consider it, in the first place, as applied to a private 
personal prediction. Suppose then, for instance, that 
I were certainly informed beforehand of my future 
destiny,—that my plans in life would fail,—that I should 
commit some terrible outrage against the order of so- 
ciety,—and that my end would be disastrous and hor- 
rible. Here indeed would be a prophecy, exact enough 
in its terms; but what would be its effect on me? 
Would it not either rouse me to a struggle against 
Omnipotence, in a fierce temper of stubborn opposition 
to the will of heaven,—or else fill me with dejection 
and despondency ? And if the latter, as is most likely, 
were the operation of such a prophecy, would it not 
paralyze every effort, and sink me into despair? Would 
it not weigh down my spirits and break my heart, and 
become itself the very instrument to hurry me into the 
gulf of ruin? And would such a communication at 
all consist with the wisdom and goodness of the Deity ? 
On the contrary, let me be assured beforehand that 
my plans will certainly sueceed,—that my career will 
be infallibly prosperous,—and that I shall leave the 
world distinguished by wealth, and honor, and renown. 
Here again, would be an exact prophecy ; but what 
would be its effect? Should I not be rendered proud 
and indolent, and presumptuous? Relying on my high 


71 


destiny, would not all humble diligence and industry 
be put to flight; and would not the very clearness of 
the prediction in this case, tend to prevent the possibil- 
ity of its fulfilment, by alluring me to neglect the 
necessary means? And would it be wise or benevo- 
lent in the Deity, to lay such a temptation in the path 
of creatures so infirm as we are? 

But now, let me be told the same thing substantially, 
in another way. Let it be said conditionally, that if I 
desert my God, and follow the evil guidance of my 
passions, my course through life will be disastrous, 
and my last end terrible and wretched ;—whereas if I 
serve my Redeemer with faithful constancy, and bring 
all my designs and desires into conformity to his will, 
I shall be prosperous and happy, and honored and 
-esteemed. The prophecy, in this mode of stating it, 
-isas much above human capacity as in the other, and as 
truly marks the divine mind, because nothing but the 
foreknowledge of God can certainly connect a partic- 
ular consequence with a particular course of conduct. 
But the effect of its language on my life, is of a totally 
different character. It no longer interferés with my 
freedom of action. (The fear which it inspires, is 
salutary and corrective. The hope which it administers 
is cheering and delightful. And’ at the close of my 
career,—looking back upon the chequered path of my 
mortal existence, and marking how accurately each 
branch of the alternative was fulfilled, in exact pro- 
portion to the extent of the declared conditions,— 
should I not acknowledge, with far deeper reverence, 
the prescience of God exhibited in such a predic- 
tion, when I should have experienced the blessed 
_ truth, that the mode in which it was manifested to me 


72 


7 


had made mea happier and a better man, and had 
thus displayed, not only the foreknowledge of the 
Deity, but also his wisdom and his love ? 

We see then, here, a principle which will serve to 
guide us to a proper understanding of the proposed ob- 
jection; namely, that it is necessary for our good, that 
prophecy should never be so clear as to interfere with 
the freedom of human agency, or with the true motives 
of moral action. For the very same enquiry which 
we have just concluded into the effect of too distinct a 
prediction upon an individual, will apply, with still 
greater force, to communities and nations; because 
the popular feeling is easily excited to any thing mis- 
chievous or extreme, and no people could safely be 
trusted with a clear and open prophecy in any other 
shape, than as it was made conditional on their obedi- 
ence or disobedience to the laws of God. 

This shews us, in the first place, why the remarkable 
predictions of the Scripture, concerning the future state 
of Israel, are usually expressed in alternative or condi- 
tional terms. And it opens the way to the reason why 
the other prophecies,—particularly those relative to 
Christ,—though not conditional, are yet, to a certain 
degree, obscure. For if they had been so plain that 
ihe Jews could not have misunderstood them, is it not 
manifest that they would either not have fulfilled them 
at all, or else they must have been compelled to fulfil 
them against their will, by the mere power of the 
Almighty ; which would have been totally inconsistent 
with his justice and his goodness, as the moral Govern- 
or of the world. L 

To understand this aright, however, let us remember 
that prophecy is the declaration beforehand of what 


73 


men will choose to do, when left to their own tree will, 
under the full exercise of their faculties, and espe- 


cially without any influence on the part of the Deity, 


constraining or tempting them to go astray. Suppose 
then, that, at the coming of Christ, the types and 
prophecies had been so arranged and so connected, 
that no man could possibly misapply them, Suppose 
that all the Jews had been obliged to acknowledge 
that Christ was the Son of God, and to see that they 
were predicted to be his murderers, and that, in con- 
sequence of this, they would be delivered up to the 
Romans, and their city destroyed after the most fright- 
ful miseries had been inflicted on them, and they 
themselves had been, some slain, some enslaved, and 
the rest driven to be wanderers throughout the earth for 
centuries together.—Suppose, I say, that the prophecies 


which declare all this, had been so clear, that the Jews 


must inevitably, and as it were, in spite of themselves, 
have fully comprehended them, what must have been 
the result? Would they not have been excited to a 
stubborn spirit of contradiction, and have refused to 
fulfil them? Would they not have resisted the natural 
current of their own wickedness, merely through fear 
for their temporal safety? Would not the case have 
presented a plain struggle between God and man,— 
the Deity saying that they would do so, and they 
replying that they would not? And under such cir- 
cumstances, is it not manifest, either that the power 


of God must have forced them to crucify the Redeem- 


er against their will, or that the truth of his predictions 
must have been disgraced forever? 

From the reasonable necessity of the case then, 
arises the great characteristic of positive prophecy, 


74 


that it must always be clear enough to determine its 
meaning, after the event has occurred, but never so 


clear beforehand as to interfere with the liberty | ‘of. 


human action. The difficulty of thus constructing it 


is so great, that no human ingenuity could have devised — 
the marvellous union of obscurity and plainness, of — 


light and shade, of doubt and certainty, which charac- 
terizes this part of the inspired word. And therefore, 
while the unbelieving Jew,—in the hardness of his 
impenitent heart,—mistook the sense of prophecy, 
and while the modern infidel,—equally impenitent and 
more proud,—derides its obscurity, the humble wor- 


shipper has always been confirmed in his faith by that. 


portion which is accomplished, and comforted by the 
promise of those events which are yet to come; and 
the reasonable and teachable mind has never failed to 
discover, in the vast and sublime comprehension of the 
plan of propheey, and the surpassing contrivance of 
its details, a constant subject of devout admiration of 
the goodness and wisdom of the Almighty. 

4, While our own reason however, may thus fully 
justify the very characteristic of obscurity, to which 
the unbeliever objects, it is easy to shew that sufficient 
clearness exists in the prophetic Scriptures, to prove 
‘the revelation to be divine. In support of this asser- 
tion, we will briefly present to you the chief predic- 
tions relating to Christ, to sundry kingdoms of the 
earth, and to the destruction of Jerusalem. 

With regard to the Redeemer, whose coming, char- 
acter, and kingdom, form the burden of the book of 
God, there is scarcely a circumstance of note which is 
not to be found in the Prophets. 

As to his birth, Moses prophesied that ‘ the seed of 


5 


the woman should bruise the serpent’s head’. Jere- 
miah recognizes the same miracle ; and Isaiah more 
fully declares that ‘a,virgin should conceive and bear 
a son. The time was fixed by Jacob to be when 
‘the sceptre was departing from Judah,’ by Haggai, 
while the city of Jerusalem and the temple were 
still standing, and by Daniel, when seven prophetic 
weeks,—that is, counting a day for a year, according 
to prophetic rule, four hundred and ninety years 
from the edict to rebuild Jerusalem after the Babylonish 
captivity,—should be fulfilled. 

The place of his birth was predicted to be Bethle- 
hem Ephrata; and the family from which he was to 
spring was to be that of Abraham, through Judah and 
David. 

The star which should mark his nativity, was men- 
tioned by the Prophet Balaam, fifteen hundred years 
before it guided the wise men of the Hast to the hum- 
ble dwelling of his mother. And his forerunner, John 
the Baptist, was expressly mentioned by Isaiah and 
Malachi, the first, eight hundred, the second, four hun- 
dred and fifty years before the time. 

Besides these predictions, his flight into Egypt,— 
his education at Nazareth,—his entry into Jerusalem,— 
his manner of teaching,—his zeal for the house of his 
Father,—ithe kind and quality of his miracles,—the 
price at which he was betrayed,—the use which was 
made of the money,—the treachery and misery of 
Judas,—the sufferings of our Lord,—his back given to 
the smiters, and his cheeks to them that plucked off 
the hair,—his wounds, bruises and stripes,—the mode 
of his death,—the piercing of his hands and feet,— 
the spear that transfixed his side,—the mockery of the 


76 


multitude,—the parting of his garments,—the lots cast 
upon his vesture,—the dying ery on the cross,—his 
grave in the sepulchre of the rich man,—his body pre- 
served from corruption,—his resurrection and ascen- 
sion, and session at the right hand of God,—and the 
everlasting glory of his kingdom,—all these are the 
distinet subjects of prophecy. What. more could the 
most incredulous desire ? 

But yet there is far more. The most peculiar and 
apparently irreconeileable characters are ascribed to 
him. He was predicted to be not only the Son of a 
woman, but the Son of God. Not only a man of sor- 
rows acquainted with grief, but also the Redeemer,— 
the Lord of hosts;—God with us,—Wonderful,—the 
Mighty God,— the everlasting Father. Onthe one 
hand, he was to suffer the depths of mortal humiliation ; 
on the other hand, he was to receive the highest possi- 
ble exaltation. In no other instance could such ex- 
tremes be found, such oppositions be united, as the 
Prophets predicted of the Messiah; and yet we know 
how accurately all was fulfilled.* 

Bat we pass on to notice a few of the rbvantkeble 
prophecies relating to the kingdoms of the earth. It 
was prophesied of Nineveh,—that exceeding great 
city of three days’ journey,—that God should make 
an utter end of it; and where is it now? Its very 
situation is unknown. It was prophesied of Tyre, the 
ancient emporium of the world,—whose merchants 
were princes and her traffickers the honorable of the 
earth,—that God would lay her stones and her timber _ 
and her dust in the midst of the waters, that she 


* Vide Wilson’s ninth Lecture, for a very full detail. 


77 


should be made like the top of a rock, a place for 


- spreading of nets in. the midst of the sea. And how 


has it been accomplished ? Volney relates that Tyre 
now consists only of fifty or sixty poor families, who 
live on the produce of their little ground and a trifling 
fishery. And Bruce states shat: it is now a rock 
whereon fishermen dry their nets; using almost the 
very language of the prophecy. 

Again, it was prophesied of Babylon that it should » 
be a perpetual desolation. Babylon, for ages after 
the pronouncing of the prediction, was the pride of 
the East, with its lofty walls on which many chariots 
could drive abreast, with its hanging gardens, once 


accounted one of the seven wonders of the world, 


with its unexampled magnificence and splendor. Yet 
its present state, as described by the latest travellers, 
corresponds most accurately to the language of the 
prophecy, delivered more than two thousand five 
hundred years before. It is literally a heap of ruins, 
and has been nothing better for fifteen centuries to- 
gether. 

_ Again, it was prophesied of Egypt, that it should 
be ‘ the basest of kingdoms, neither shall it exalt itself 
any more among the nations. There shall be no 


prince of the land of Egypt, the sceptre of Egypt 


shall pass away.’ At the time when this prediction 


was uttered, Egypt was one of the mightiest kingdoms 
of the earth. It was the nursery of science and the 
arts, and even to this hour, no country presents such 
attractions to the antiquarian. But where is its great- 
ness? For two thousand years it has been declining. 


_Every attempt to elevate its character has proved 


abortive. Its literary eminence has fled,—its political 
a . | 


2 
x 


- 


78 


- importance has vanished, and there is nothing to re- 
mind us of its former fame, except the records of his- 


fh lhe A 
tory, and the colossal remains of that massy architee- 


ture which seems to mock the power of time. 

We pass by many other examples of equal clearness, 
particularly the famous prophecy of Daniel, which 
sketches with such accuracy the progress of the four 
great kingdoms of the world, that many~infidels have 


been driven boldly to deny its authenticity as their 


last resource. We shall only, in addition, remind you 
of the prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem, as 
first given in the book of Deuteronomy, and afterwards, 
in greater detail, by our Lord himself. ‘See ye not? 
~ gaith the Saviour, ‘ these great buildings? Verily I say 
unto you, there shall not be left one stone upon an- 
other, that shall not be thrown down. These be the 
days of vengeance, that all things that are written may 
be fulfilled, for in those days shall be great tribulation, 
such as was not from the beginning of the world unto 
this time, no, nor ever shall be, and Jerusalem shall be 
trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the 
Gentiles shall be fulfilled.’ 

We do not propose to dwell on the particular details 
of the fulfilment of this prophecy. Suffice it to say, 
that at the time it was delivered, nothing could be 
more unlikely. The Jews were ‘at peace, protected 
by the power of the Roman sceptre. Yet according 
tothe word of our Lord, before that generation passed 
away, viz., in less than forty years from their denial 
and rejection of Christ, all was accomplished. Jerusa- 
lem was destroyed. The temple was thrown down, 
and its very foundations razed to the ground. Upwards 
of a million perished miserably in the siege, almost 


v } 


J 79 4 


one hundred thousand were sold as slaves, and the — 


rest were dispersed among all nations. As if in retri- 
bution for their crucifixion of the’ Redeemer, they 
themselves were crucified in such numbers by the 
Romans without the walls of Jerusalem, that in the 
language of the historian, ‘room was wanting for the 
crosses, and crosses for the bodies.2 And to this day 
the Jews continue dispersed, an outcast, oppressed, 
and unhappy people. | Still, however, they remain 
distinct, a standing miracle amongst the nations of the 
world ; for the prophecy again has promised that they 
shall not perish. ‘When they be in the land of their 
enemies,’ saith God, ‘1 will not cast them away, neither 
will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly. 1 will 
make a full end of the nations whither I have driven 
them, but I will not make a full end of thee.’ And 
therefore they remain, preserving with the utmost care 
the very prophecies which condemn them, vainly 
looking for the Messiah whom they have rejected, and — 
suffering uncounted miseries in the hope of being 
restored to their own land. In this, however, they 
will not be disappointed. For the same divine prophe- 
cies assure us that they shall. yct acknowledge their 
Redeemer, and be gathered unto Jerusalem, and be- 
come the joy of the whole earth. Anda long reign 
of piety and peace shall follow, and then shall be a 
short and final struggle of the powers of darkness, and 
at length the great consummation of all things shall 
arrive, when truth and holiness shall triumph, and sin 
and sorrow shall be known no more. 

Now all the predictions to which we have briefly 
referred, my brethren, are distinct and plain in terms. 
Their obscurity is chiefly, if not altogether, to be at- 


80 


tributed to their being mentioned abruptly, and so 
mixed with other matters, as not to strike the attention 
of a careless reader. But diamonds are not the less 
diamonds, because they are found scattered in the 
earth, nor are prophecies less prophecies, because they 
are clothed in metaphor, or interspersed with narra- 
tive, or forms of devotion. In the world of nature, gold 
and jewels lie below the surface, and eseape the 
thoughtless and indolent eye. Nay, even when found, 
they are not always recognized until some pains and 
labor have been bestowed to shew their real lustre. 
And is it reasonable that in the world of grace, the 
gold of divine truth, and the gems of celestial know- 
ledge should not likewise need some search, some care, - 
some honest reflection, before they can be fully ex- 
hibited, or thoroughly understood ? Hence, although 
nothing can exceed the full glow of delighted convic- 
tion which is experienced by the humble and enquiring 
mind, in contemplating the munificent exuberance of 
evidence furnished by the prophetie portion of the 
book of God, yet it does not force conviction upon 
the unwilling. The strongest species of evidence could 
not do that. Even the miracles of Christ. were attri- 
buted to Satan by those who were determined to cred- 
it any absurdity rather than the word of the Redeemer. 
But to the candid and the sincere searcher after truth, 
the prophecies furnish an inexhaustible mine of spirit- 
ual riches. The mercy, the justice, the wisdom, the 
knowledge of God, are exhibited by them in the most 
astonishing perfection ; and the concentration and ac- 
cumulated power of all their testimonies, excites the 
highest admiration in the intellect and the deepest 
reverence in the soul. 


81 


5. It remains that we notice, in the fifth and last: 
place, the doctrine of our most noted infidels on this 
branch of the evidences of Christianity, which we shall 
perhaps do best by quoting to you the very words of 
Rousseau, the same eloquent Deist whose argument 
against miracles we considered in the last discourse. 
‘As to the prophecies’ says this philosopher, ‘ no pro- 
phecy can have any authority with me, because in order 


to satisfy my mind, three things would be necessary, 


the concurrence of which is impossible. First, that I 
had been a witness of the. prophecy, secondly, that I 
had been a witness of the fulfilment, and thirdly 
that it should be demonstrated, that this fulfilment 
could not have happened by chance. Because the 
clearness of a prediction made by guess, does not 
render the accomplishment of it impossible, and there- 
fore even the apparent fulfilment of a prophecy, proves 
nothing.’* 


This method of reasoning is truly a worthy compan- 
ion for: the plan of miracles which the same writer 
- modestly proposes as an improvement on the Christian 
system. Nay, it is, if possible, more supremely ab- 


surd, since it would deprive the Deity of all power to 
manifest his foreknowledge to our world in any mode 
whatever. For first, this profound ecaviller tells us he 
must hear the original prediction, and then he must 
see the corresponding event, forgetting altogether, that 


the certainty of the prediction’s having been actually 


delivered, is just as great when shewn in a book, 
as it could possibly be if he had heard the Pro- 


= 


tte: Se ee ee 


%Emile. liv. 4. 224 


82 


phet deliver it. But even this would not suffice him. 
For suppose the Almighty to have yielded to the 
perverseness of such folly, so as to have caused this ‘a 
man to have lived in the days of Moses and the Proph- | 
ets, and to have continued his life for fifteen hundred 
years until he could have witnessed Jesus Christ 
fulfilling all the marvellous predictions concerning him, 
and supposing that from thence he had still been kept 
in being to the present day, in order to shew him the 
accurate accomplishment of other prophecies regarding 
the condition of the various ancient cities and countries, 
the establishment of the Church, and the dispersion of 
the Jews,—-still after all this, he might turn round upon 
his third requisition, and ask to have it demonstrated, 
forsooth, that these events did'ngt happen by chance, 
Just as the atheist asks to have it demonstrated that the 
universe might not have existed by chance. Plainly 
then does Rousseau betray the hostile temper of his 
own mind, when he demands three conditions for his 
assent to prophecy, the concurrence of which he 
himself declares to be impossible. For this is precisely 
equivalent with saying, that it is impossible for the 
Omnipotent God to have arranged any convincing 
system of predictions whatever. And so we have this 
rational infidel denying the very power of the Almighty 
to manifest his foreknowlege by any method, to the sat- 
isfaction of his creatures. In vain we prove that the 
prophecies of the Old Testament have been for more 
than twenty-five hundred years in the sacred books of 
the Jews—although they have certainly no interest in 
defending the predictions relating to Christ, and to their 
own condemnation and degradation, and therefore 
their safe guardianship is above suspicion. In yain we 


83 


- shew the complete correspondence of the events with 
the predictions, in the birth, life, sufferings, and death 
of Christ, the establishment of his kingdom, the de- 
struction of Jerusalem, and the dispersion of the Jews. 
The infidel replies, ‘ All this isnothing. The predictions 
might have been made by chance, and the events might 
have corresponded by chance.’ What ! all these events, 
so astonishing and so utterly unparalleled, predicted 
by so many different men, at such disfant periods, and 
not one found to fail in a lapse of thirty-three hundred 
years? ‘ Yes,’ replies our philosopher, ‘even so. I will 
-not believe these prophecies until you shall bring me 
three conditions, the concurrence of which I acknow- 
ledge to be totally impossible. Unless I had lived three 
thousand years ago, and heard allthe predictions with 
my own ears, and beheld their fulfilment with my own 
eyes, I would not believe'the Bible. Nay, even if I had 
heard and seen it all, still I would not believe ; I would 
impute it all to chance, rather than submit to the Gospel 
of salvation.’ Alas, if this be wisdom, what is folly ? 
May the Almighty reduce my mind to the drivelling 
imbecility of idiocy, or the ravings of insanity itself, 
rather than suffer it to be perverted and poisoned by 
such philosophy as this ! 

But it is time, my beloved brethren, that we should 
close our imperfect examination of a subject, which 
has filled volumes, and which never can be exhausted 
by the industry or eloquence of man. We fear that 
we have already trespassed on your attention, and 
therefore we leave this branch of the Christian evi- 
dences, fully sensible that we have left unsaid much 
that belongs to it, and that what we have submitted to 
you might have been far more happily illustrated and 

\ 


\ 


84 


explained. The truth however is, that not only is the 
immensity of the subject too vast for the limits ofa 
sermon, but it is too oppressive for the powers of an 
ordinary mind. For the purpose of this discourse, I 
have meditated on the beginning of prophecies, when 
the Deity consoled our exiled first parents, by the 
promise of the victorious seed of woman. I have 
marked its course in giving warning of the deluge, and 
in the assurance of returning fruitfulness and peace ; 
the prediction of Noah, the covenant with Abraham, 
the blessings pronounced by Jacob, the prophecy of 
Balaam, the enlarged manifestation of the divine fore- 
knowledge by Moses, then Samuel, David, Isaiah, 
Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, and his twelve successors, 
until Malachi closes the prophetic canon previous to 
the coming of Christ, and the great object of the pre- 
paratory system is fulfilled. I have marked how the 
Saviour minutely collected together every dispersed 
ray of prophetic light, until they all met in him as . 
in one centre of glory. I have thought on his own 
blessed predictions—his enemies overthrown, their 
habitation desolate, their nation scattered to the four 
winds, and yet marvellously preserved to the latter 


day for the ingathering of Israel. .I have followed the -_ 


progress of his Church from its small beginning in the 
hands of a few fishermen of Galilee, untilit has spread 
hrough all the earth, established itself without a rival 
in the fairest and best half of the globe, and is ready 
to extend his name to every quarter. Ij/have thought 
hbw surely his prophecy was accomplished, that the 
gates of hell should not prevail against it; I have 
traced even its very divisions and corruptions in the 
epistles and the revelation of St. John: and with all 


- 


85 . 


this already fulfilled,—standing not far from the verge of 
time,—I have gazed along the luminous track which the 
same prophecy describes—the future exaltation of the 
Saints in the eternal world ;—and I have felt the heart 
kindle, and the intellect fall prostrate in the mighty con- 
templation of the majesty, the splendor, the wisdom, 
the knowledge, the wonderful condescension and love 
displayed in the revelation of God. And when, from 
this glorious subject, I turned to read the cold, the 
sickening cavils of the infidel,—when I looked to see 
the ruthless sophistry with which he tried to deface 
and blast every hope and consolation of the soul,—I 
felt that no powers which I possessed could do any 
justice to the contrast,—yea, and I feel now, that though 
I could speak with the tongue of men and of angels, 
yet I could not present to you, as I- would, the sur- 
passing magnitude of the interests which hang upon 
the book of God. | 

Read then for yourselves, my brethren. Read with 
an humble spirit and a docile heart. Read with ear- 
nest and sincere prayer, that the Being who dictated, 
may mercifully teach you to understand and apply his 
Gospel. There at last you will find the most precious 
evidence of its truth. There on your knees, you will 
most surely learn, that the Saviour whose testimony is 
the spirit of prophecy, is indeed the Giver of life, 
and light, and joy. | 


e 


DISCOURSE VI. 


Acts, V. 38,39 Riad 


iy THIS COUNSEL OR THIS WORK BE OF MEN, IT WILL COME TO NOUGHT; BIT 


| Tf IT BE OF GOD, YE CANNOT OVERTHROW IT, LEST HAPLY YE BE FOUND 
EVEN TO FIGHT AGAINST Gop. 


aL. Tue object of our present discourse, my brethren, is 
to shew that evidence of the truth of Christianity, 
which is derived from the establishment of the Church. 
We have set before you, In our previous discourses, 
the authenticity of the Scriptures, the argument derived 
from miracles, and that which rests on prophecy. We 
have examined, by the way, the absurd and impossible 
schemes of the infidel, in proposing what he presumes 
would be a better species of proof; and we have 
found, in every instance, the rank folly, which, under 
the assumption of superior wisdom, is attempted to be 
palmed upon mankind. And we now come to consid- 
er the evidence of divine truth afforded by the simple 
fact, that the Church of Christ was built up by the 
Apostles, in the very face of opposition, and has grown 
and flourished to the present day, notwithstanding all 
the assaults of the powers of darkness, and the wit and 
sophistry of mankind; proving the hand of Deity, 
according to the reasoning. of the text, for if this 
counsel or this work had been of men, it would have 


a 
ve 


87 


come to nought ; but if it was of God, they could not 
overthrow it. 

Now in order to understand, fully and fairly, this as- 
- pect of the question, we shall endeavor to state it in its 
simplest form. The religion of Jesus Christ is either 
true of false. We say, that it is the truth of the Eternal 
and Only Wise God ; the infidel replies, Nay, but it is 
the imposture of men. We ask ther, if this were the 
fact, how could it have been established, at such a 
time, and by such instruments. We aver, that to 
account for its success on human principles, is totally 


impossible; and that to believe it to have been so’ | 


established, while yet it was a‘mere imposition, re- 
quires an hundred fold more credulity, than is necessary. 
to acknowledge the work to be divine. in 
We make this assertion in direct reference to the 
elaborate essay of the famous Gibbon, whose history 
of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire is familiar 
to every educated mind, and who has perhaps produced 
the most specious and plausible of all attempts to account 


for the establishment and progress of Christianity, on . 


mere human principles. And we shall shew, as we trust | 
satisfactorily, that his argument is entitled to no weight 
from any sound thinker, notwithstanding the elegance 
of its dress, and the subtle insinuation of its sophistry. 
It is indeed no easy task, to compress within the nar- 
row limits of a single discourse, the chief points 
involved in such a discussion, so as to make them plain 
and perspicuous to the ordinary -hearer ; but. relying 
on the guidance and aid of Him, who is the way, 
the truth, and the life, we address ourselves to the 
task, earnestly -supplicating for you, my brethren, the 
disposition of candid attention and good will. We all 


- Te | bg tle 
pn ee 
+ ae Dy 
#® a ey a? 
oe Yi 
eos x 
Ae 
ae OY 


ey 
g 


88 . 


» 


know the force of prejudice, and the utter uselessness _ 


of the clearest reasoning, until the heart be rightly 
inclined to agree with the undérstanding. May the 
Lord be present with us, so that you who are already 
Christians, shall have your faith strengthened and 
confirmed ; and that you who are as yet unconvinced, 
if any such there be, may be enabled to embrace, 
with humble confidence, the Gospel of salvation. 

Let us then reflect, in the first place, on the time, 
the place, and the persons belonging to: the rise of 
Christianity ; and thus we shall the better estimate 
the infidel supposition, that it was an imposture. 

The time was that celebrated period called the 
Augustan age, when the human mind _ had, perhaps, 
attained the highest point of literary cultivation ; when 
Rome was settled in repose and peace, as the, undis- 
puied mistress of the civilized world ;—when the 
_ various schools of philosophy had extended their ut- 
most sway, and eloquence and poetry, music and 
painting, architecture and sculpture, with all. the arts 
of the most refined voluptuousness, had achieved their 
most perfect victory. The lapse of sixteen centuries 
did afterwards, indeed, produce many mutations. The 
obscurity of comparative barbarism spread itself abroad, 


and brooded over Europe, during a long night of 


ignorance and superstition. And since the light of 
the reformation has dissipated the gloom, we deny not 
that the world has gone beyond all previous history, 


in some branches of science and the arts. But to 


this day, the pre-eminence of the Augustan age con- 
tinues undisputed in the peculiar track of literary 
culture which concerns the point before us. To this 
day, their poetry, their oratory, their philosophy, their 


¥ 


le 
history, are studied with delight; and our very chil- 
dren are taught to regard the productions of their 
genius, as the proudest triumphs of intellectual ambi- 
‘tion. | | : 
Now then we ask, whether a handful of poor and un- 
regarded men could come into this country with a story 
as wonderful as that of the Gospel, and persuade any. 
considerable or respectable portion of our fellows to 
‘believe and to embrace it, if it were not true ? We ask 
whether any man can for one moment think that in our 
day, such an imposition could be established and pre- 


vail, so as, in a century or two, to become almost uni- 


versal? And if such an imposition could not possibly 
succeed now, how could it have sueceeded during the 
-Augustan age of Rome, when we know, from the 
most abundant testimony, that society possessed all 
the literary refinement required to detect and expose 
it, in. a degree as high, if not higher than ourselves, 
‘and when the union of the civilized world under one 
emperor, and a state of profound peace, gave ail men 
the most ample opportunity to investigate the fraud, 
and consign it to derision and contempt. 

It may indeed be replied, that we have examples, 
in our own day, of the most extravagant credulity ,— 
false prophets,—leaders of sects and parties,—such as 
Joanna Southcote of England, and the pretended dis- 


— eoverers of the golden Bible in a neighboring state, 


and hundreds of fanatics as wild. as these,—and so it 
may be asserted, that the establishment of Christian- 
ity proves nothing, since it is easy to find some in 
every age, ready to adopt any folly whatever. But 
this is shallow reasoning, for the cases are totally dis- 


similar. The instances of religious enthusiasm with 
5° 


a 


90 


which we are best acquainted, did not profess to make 
war upon all the existing systems, but admitted them,— 
only modifying, or adding to them, in some few res- 
pects. Thus the disciples of the English impostor 
acknowledged the Christian faith, and’ erred only in : 
ascribing to her some of the prophe bites which ration- 
ally admitted of no such absurd interpretation. So 
too, the pretended discoverers of the golden Bible 
admit the Scriptures, and follow the prevailing faith, 
but add to this, a false and ridiculous claim to a new 
revelation. Wilereha: the Apostles adopted nothing 
of the system of the day, in the Roman Empire. On 
the contrary, they condemned it all. Neither did they 
agree to any of the philosophic schools, but condemn- 
ed them likewise. Of course, there was no eommon 


_ principle of belief, between them and the Gentile 


world. There wasno prejudice of education, or pre- 
vious persuasion, in their favor. And, consequently, 
there was no point on which they could claim the 
slightest alliance ; but so far from it, that every system 
existing “HOUR the heathen, tether of philosophy 


or of boleion: must have ben in arms against that 


Gospel, shied openly. professed to destroy them all. 
Secondly, however, and chiefly,—let it be noted, that 


_ we have no account of the rise of any religious im- 


position, since the period of authentic history, which 
succeeded bey ond the little circle of the first impostor. 

Such atteinpts may have a partial influence, but they 
have never extended far, and never Hourished long,— 


invariably dying away with the next generation. How 


then, can they be compared with the establishment of 
Christianity, which took such deep and firm root, as 
to fill the Roman Empire, and flourish with increas- 


' 


91 


ing vigor to the present hour? The contrast only 
shews us, the more plainly, the truth laid down in the 
text,—that ‘if this counsel or device be of men it will 
come to nought, but if it be of God, ye cannot over- 
throw it.’ | 

But it may be objected again, that the rise of Ma- 
hometanism proves how easily men may be deluded to 
such an extent, as to plant a false system amongst 
whole nations, and perpetuate it for twelve centuries 
in succession ; and hence, it may be argued that the 
Apostles might have succeeded as well with a fraud, 
as with a divine revelation. | 

Here again, however, the reflecting mind sees the | 
total want of similarity. For first, let it be observed, 
that Mahomet did not assault all the existing systems 
of his day, because he took a certain portion of his 
scheme from both the Jew and the Christian. He 
acknowledged Moses and the Prophets, and also ac- 
knowledged Christ asthe Messiah of God. Secondly, 
we must remember that his system was not broached 
in the Augustan age,—when refinement, learning, 
philosophy, and peace were flourishing together,— 
but six hundred years afterwards, when the Roman 
Empire had been dismembered, when the irruptions 
of barbarism had defaced the fairest monuments of 
science, and the darkness of ignorance and superstition 
had already begun its reign, even in the Church itself. 

Thirdly, and principally, let it be observed, that 
Mahomet had no success beyond his own immediate 
connexions, until he took up the sword of slaughter, 
and that all the important conquests of the Koran are 
written in blood. Fourthly, and Jastly, let it be spe- 
cially marked, that Mahomet did not establish his 


ers 
92 ; 


ayeions by any appeal to dhiradleg or prophecy. Im- 
postor as he was, he did not dare to lay claim to the 
works performed by the Apostles. Comparatively dark — 
as was the age, and comparatively barbarous as were — 
the people amongst whom he lived, he did not dream — 
of planting a new-religion by appealing to facts,—pub- 
lic and notorious facts,—which never happened. So 
that this case, when properly considered, only serves. 
the more to shew the utter impossibility of the Apos- 
tles planting the Church of Christ, in the period of 
the highest literary renown, and in the face of every 
existing system, by.the mere appeal to facts,—if their 
system had not possessed the only confirmation on 
which they relied,—viz. thé indisputable truth of those 
facts, and the visible manifestation of the hand of God 


‘in support of their doctrine. 


We recur then, to what we think the simplest form 
in which to ie: this question. Is it possible to be- 
lieve that a dozen men could go through the towns and 
cities of our own land now—preach that we were all 
deceived—all mistaken,—that our worship should be — 
abolished—our temples destroyed—our ‘teachers aban- 
doned,—that our whole system of religious knowledge — 
was an abomination anda lie, and that if we continued 
it, we should do so at the’ peril of our souls’ perdi- 
tion,—is it possible that these men,—thus making war - 
on all we had been accustomed, from infancy, to be- 
lieve and revere, and rousing every preacher and 
public instructor in the land against them,—should be 
able to persuade us that they alone had the knowledge 
of God, by pretending to work miracles, without the 
power ?. And when, in every place, a portion of our 
people had been so enraged by their plain dealing, 


> 


Ns 
as to stones and scourge, and imprison théni pe 
they so juggle with the senses of the rest, as to pre- 
vail upon them to adopt their system by mere decep- 
tion? And is it possible that, in this enlightened age, 
a little company of men could, in this way, actually 


aenaad in planting their opinions, so as to form a ~ 


Church in every place throughout our country ; always 
persecuted, always abused, always opposed, always 
appealing to supernatural powers, which never could 
be counterfeited by the united ability of man, and 
always more or less successful, never discovered nor 
betrayed,—and yet, that after all, such men should 


‘be nothing more than a band of knavish impostors ? | 


Now it seems to our mind, that any one who can 
believe such a fraud possibie in our day, must have 
taken leave of his senses. And we aver, that it was 
equally impossible in the Augustan age, when Christ- 
ianity was established ; for a period more enlightened, 
more refined, more philosophical, more sceptical, 
more. equal to our own in every intellectual power, 
the history of our world has never seen. 

2. But the impossibility of such a fraud, at such a 
period, becomes yet more glaring, when we recollect 
the place in which Christianity arose, namely, Judea. 
For Gibbon himself describes the Jews as a base and 
disregarded people. ‘The sullen obstinacy’ says he 
‘with. which they maintained their peculiar rights and 
unsocial manners, seemed to mark them out a distinct 
species of men, who boldly professed, or who faint- 
ly disguised, their implacable hatred to the rest of 
human kind.’ ‘ According to their maxims of univer- 
sal toleration,’ continues he, ‘ the Romans protected a 


- 


i 


we 


superstition which they despised.2* And this con- 
temptuous sentiment of Greece and Rome towards 
Judea, is strongly intimated in the well known line of 
i onttal where, alluding to what he considers incred- 
ible, he says,—‘ let ihe circumcised Jew believe it, 
not I... The general odium and _ ridicule, therefoke, | 
which attended the Jewish character among the pol- — 
ished and refined heathen of that period, was a strong 
additional obstacle to the establishment of the Church. 
And a system of faith and obedience which acknow- | 
ledged the God of Israel as the only living and true _ 
God »—which referred to the Prophets of Israel, and — 
sought for salvation through the atonement oternd by 
_Christ,—a crucified Jew, according to the flesh,—a 
system which gave the first rank to the stock of 
Abraham, and considered the Greeks and Romans as 
only grafted upon that stock, and made Jerusalem the 
type and the depository of every thing excellent and 
glorious upon earth,—surely it is obvious that such a 
system must have been utterly repugnant tothe na- 
tional pride of every Greek and Roman; and this 
very circumstance,—the general contempt and odium 
connected with the place in which the Gospel arose,— 
must have doubly sharpened every prejudice, and | 
rendered any attempt at imposture more desperate ~ 
than ever. 

3. We recur, thirdly, to the consideration of the 
persons by whom this revelation was established. In 
questions of religion, the world had been accustomed, 
for ages, to take its ideas from priests and kings, from 
law-givers and sages, whose power, or learning, or 


a 
| 94 & 


* Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol, 1 p. 394, 


{ 


reputation, gave their opinions weight and dignity. 

And at the period of which we are speaking, if twelve 
illustrious philosophers had discovered the sublime 
mysteries of Christian truth, and had united in propa- 
gating them, with all the powers of genius and the 
influence of character, it might not have been so 
wonderful that they should have succeeded in estab- 
lishing some of the principles of the Gospel morality, 
though we cannot see how they could have succeeded 
in producing a belief of the Gospel facts. The first — 
Church, we must remember, was gathered at Jerusalem, 
the very place where the astonishing life, miracles, 
and death of Christ were publicly known, and where, 
if they had not been publicly known, no possible 
combination of deceivers could have eee the 
people that they had seen them. From Judéa, the 

truth and the miracles of the Apostles went together, 
into all the civilized world ; and had they been the 
greatest men who ever saw the light, they could nei- 
ther have displayed the miraculous powers, nor proved 
the extraordinary facts, on which the Gospel was 
founded, if these powers were only a pretence, and 
if those facts were only the product of their own in- 
vention. But when,—instead of being philosophers, or 
orators, or priests, or kings,—we behold their humble 
origin, their ignorance, their simplicity, their total de- 
ficiency in those appearances and qualities which com- 
mand the esteem or applause of men, and their constant 
appeal to facts, plain incontrovertible facts, instead of 
eloquence, or artifice, or argument,—we see how ut- 
terly absurd is the allegation that such were the men 
who were able to deceive the world, and establish 
the Church upon the basis of their own imposture. 


96 


But, beside these considerations of the period at 
which, the place where, and the persons by whom, the 
Church of Christ was thus firmly and permanently 


erected, let us not forget the terrible obstacle of — 
fiery persecution, and the personal renunciation of sin — 


and worldly indulgence, and the. severe self denial, 


and the separation from family, and friends, and home, — 
and kindred,—connected with the first profession of | 
the Christian faith. These circumstances alone, go to — 


* shew the impossibility of the Apostles being deceivers, 
for why should they wish to deceive, when they could 
hope for no other reward than these? But the same 
circumstances go equally to demonstrate the impossi- 


bility of their succeeding in imposing a deception on. 


mankind, since the fact that such difficulties and trials 
lay in the way of every disciple, must have made all 
men jealous of the proof, and must have induced a 
rigid examination of the sincerity of the first heralds 
of the cross, before which the most accomplished dis- 
sembler would have faltered, in confusion and dismay. 

After thus glaneing at the various circumstances which 
the wisdom of God selected for his blessed revelation, 
to shew the candid and honest mind the certainty of 
its truth, and the utter impossibility of his Church 
having been established by any system of human 
management whatever, we now turn to the reasons 


ind by the infidel historian already named, which 
he considers sufficient to account for the success of — 


Christianity, on human principles. These are, in his 
own words, ‘first, the inflexible and intolerant zeal 
of the Christians, derived from the Jewish religion, 
but purified from the narrow and unsocial spirit, which, 
instead of inviting, had deterred the Gentiles from 


3 


é 


97 


embracing the law of Moses. Secondly, the doctrine of 
a future life, improved by every additional circumstance 
which could give weight and efficacy to that important 
truth. Thirdly, the claim of miraculous powers by 


the primitive Church. Fourthly, the pure and aus- 


tere morals of the Christians. And fifthly, the un- 
jon and discipline of the Christian republic, which 


gradually formed an independent and increasing state 
inthe heart of the Roman Empire.’ These five reasons 


might all be fairly and honestly considered as secondary 
causes of the progress of the Church; but the his- 
torian artfully brings them in, as sufficient to effect its 
first establishment; and under cover of a mock reve- 
rence for the principles of the faith, seeks to subvert 
it by the most dexterous yet fallacious sophistry. We 
shall now endeavor, briefly, to shew the worthlessness 
of his argument, when applied to the point in question, 
viz. the truth of the Christian system, derived from 
the firm establishment of the Church by the Apostles 
1. The first cause which he assigns for the establish- 
ment of the Church, namely, the zeal,—the inflexible, 
and as he calls it, the intclerant zeal of the primitive 
Christians »—is Wtaehiiy the effect of their religion. 
_They could not have been zealous for the Gospel Weil 
they had embraced the Gospel. How did it happen 
that their zeal was so great, if their faith was not 
strong? And seeing that the first Church was establish- 
ed in Jerusalem, on the very spot where the Redeemer 
lived and died,—how should their faith have been 
strong, if they knew themselves to be envaged in 
establishing a lie, which exposed them to so many 
sufferings in this life, and which assuredly could not 
profit ee in the life to come ? This question, which 


oo .. 


98 


is the true point at issue, the infidel historian does not 
pretend to answer. | 

2. The second human cause assigned by Gibbon for 
the success of the Christian Church, is the doctrine of 
a future life. He details, very fully and candidly, the 
darkness and uncertainty of the wisest heathen phi- 
losophers, on the subject of the soul’s immortality, and 
acknowledges, that notwithstanding the sublime specu- 
lations of the Platonic school, in the days of Cicero 
and the first Czsars, ‘at the bar and in the senate of | 
Rome, the ablest orators were not apprehensive of 
giving offence to their hearers, by exposing that doc- 
trine as an idle and extravagant opinion, which was 
rejected with contempt by every man of a liberal 
education and understanding.’ 

We confess ourselves unable to comprehend, from 
these premises, the conclusion of Gibbon, stated a 
little after in these words, that ‘when the promise of 
eternal happiness was proposed to mankind, on condi- 
tion of adopting the faith and of observing the precepts 
of the Gospel, it is no wonder that so advantageous an 
offer should have been accepted by great numbers, of 
every religion, of every rank, and of every province 
in the Roman Empire.’ For it seems to us that if, as 
he correctly states, this doctrine was previously reject- 
ed with contempt, as an idle and extravagant opinion, 
by the philosophic and refined portion of the Gentile 
world, it must have formed rather an objection to the 
progress of Christianity, and have excited, at its first 
annunciation, the same derision of which we read in the 
book of the Acts, when St. Paul preached at Athens. 
But be this as it may, the question recurs, how did the 
Apostles prove and establish a doctrine, which Plato 


ug 


and his followers had attempted in vain, if they were 
only a set of impostors? How did the first preachers 
overcome the contemptuous derision of the Gentiles, 
and induce them to embrace this very doctrine in 
its most sublime extent, if they were not in truth 
armed with a kind of demonstration altogether supe- 
rior to any human ability? Here again, is the sub- 
stantial enquiry, which the infidel historian totally 
evades. | 

3. The third argument assigned by this subtle an- 
tagonist, for the establishment of the Church, is the’ 
power of miracles ascribed to the first Christians ; and 
this he artfully endeavors to discredit, by confounding 
the real miracles by which the Gospel was first attested, 
with the subsequent records of superstition and credu- 
lity. But the Augustan age of Rome was no time 
for twelve poor and illiterate men to pull down existing 
systems, by deceiving the world with a pretence of 
this description. The rage and prejudice of the Jews 
afforded no favorable audience for the display of pious 
frauds; and there is the widest possible difference 
between the Apostles claiming and exercising their 
stupendous commission in the presence of sceptics and 
enemies, in order to build up the Church, and their 
successors, magnifying or distorting natural events, by 
mistake or misrepresentation, long after the Church 
was established. 

4. The fourth cause of the progress of the faith, 
mentioned by Gibbon, is one, which we should suppose 
enough, of itself, to prove the truth and divine author- 
ity of our religion. Itis the acknowledged virtues 
and holy lives of the primitive disciples. The historian 
confesses, that ‘their serious and sequestered life, averse 


100 


to the gay luxury of the age, inured them to chastity, 
temperance, economy, and all the sober and domestic 
virtues. The contempt of the world exercised them 
in the habits of humility, meekness, and patience. 
The more they were persecuted, the more closely they 
adhered to each other. And their mutual charity and 
unsuspecting confidence were often remarked by infi- 
dels themselves.’* Nay, the same author adds this 
strong expression, ‘it.is an honorable circumstance,’ 
says he, ‘ for the morals of the primitive Christians, that 
even their faults, or rather errors, were derived from 
an excess of virtue.’ Now it is an astonishing proof 
of the power of prejudice, that he should labor to 
reduce all this to the operation of policy, enthusiasm, 
and pride. But how did it happen that no other system, 
except the Christian, has ever produced such a reform- 
ation in the most corrupt and flagitious of mankind ? 
How could it be that a scheme of fraud, imposed upon 
the world by a handful of illiterate pretenders, should 
have done more for the cause of human morality, than 
all the wisdom of the most learned and philosophic 
sages since the world began? Policy, enthusiasm, and 
pride have always existed amongst men, and every 
sect has had an equal interest in preserving the appear- 
ance, at least, of purity and virtue. But it is the glory 
of Christianity, that no other religion was ever known, 
which had the power of purifying and sanctifying ‘the 
human heart. And this practical efficacy is, of itself, 
the best demonstration of the origin of our faith. 
This alone conclusively proves that the system is 
divine. 


* Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. 1. p. 420, 


101 


5. The fifth and last cause, assigned by this sceptic- 
al writer, for the progress of Christianity, is ‘the union 
and discipline of the Church, which gradually formed _ 
an independent and increasing state in the heart of 
the Empire.’ How far this might have contributed to 
such a result, after the Church became fully establish- 
ed, we shall not enquire; but certain it is, that no 
such principle could have assisted its commencement, 
for the very plain reason that Christian societies must _ 
have been extensively organized, and increasing during 
many years, before their union and discipline could. 
have made any impression on the world in general ; 
nor are we sure, that this impression could have drawn 
half as many towards the Church, as the fear of perse- 
cution would have probably driven from it, during the 
three first centuries. The argument, however, is not 
worth discussing, because it has no bearing upon the 
point at issue; for the question is not what sort of 
impression the Church made upon mankind, after its 
establishment, but how it became established at all, if 
the Apostles had not derived their doctrines and their 
powers from the Almighty. 

The lover of truth, then, may rise from the artful — 
assault of this antagonist, with a confirmed assurance 
that no man can fairly evade the demonstration which 
the Christian system claims, on this ground alone. The 
infidel historian, with all his learning, his dexterity, 
_and his management, presumes not to dispute that the 
Church was established at the very time and by the men 
recorded in the Scriptures. He presumes not to dis- 
pute that it spread through the whole Roman Empire, 
which then included the entire civilized portion of the 
globe, Son, a very brief period. He recognizes 


102 r 


the complaint of the heathen Lucian, in the first cen- 
tury, that his native country Pontus, ‘was filled with 
Epicureans and Christians,’ and the statement of Pliny, 
who writes to the emperor Trajan, within eighty years 
after the death of Christ, that ‘the heathen temples 
were almost deserted, that the sacred victims scarcely 
found any purchasers, and that Christianity had not 
only infected the cities, but had spread itself into 
the villages and the open country.’ All this he ad- 
mits, for in his character of historian he could not 
controvert it. And when he tries to account for the 
astonishing fact, he does not suggest one solitary reason 
for the success of the faith, which impugns its divine 
original; nor can he find one single hypothesis to shew 
how, by any possibility, the Apostles could have con- 
sented to become martyrs for the sake of palming a 
falsehood upon mankind, or how they could have 
succeeded in such a wild attempt, even had they been. 
so insane as to undertake it. 

Here then, my brethren, we may rest this branch 
of the evidence of Christianity, securely. One of the 
very first historians, writing on the precise point, him- 

self a determined infidel, cannot deny that the Apostles 
- did establish the Church of Christ, during the Augustan 
age, not only in Judea, but in the most refined and 
polished cities of Greece and Rome. He cannot deny | 
that they did it, without human eloquence or power, 
without influence or character, without science or 
learning,—nay, in the very face of all these, in the 
teeth of opposition, in spite of all the odium which 
Jewish rage and Gentile calumny could heap upon 
them, in spite of the most bitter persecutions, in spite 
of ridicule, and hatred, and laws, and councils, and 


> 
‘ 


; | : 

; prisons, and scourgings, and the most cruel deaths. He 
cannot deny, that the Apostles planted the Church by 
appealing to plain facts, facts of which the most igno- 

rant could judge as well as the most learned, and ~ 
facts of such a nature as precluded the Goasikstiiy of 
imposition—the life, the miracles, the crucifixion of 
Christ, —the ES alse of hy Jerusalem Church 
by the public miracles of the day of Pentecost,—the 
marvellous powers forthwith claimed and exercised by 
the Apostles,—the gifts of tongues and prophecy, con- 
ferred on others by the laying on of their hands,— 
the innumerable miracles of healing, performed in the 
name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,—all these were 
notorious,—-they were the weapons of the apostolic 
warfare,—they were the seals of the apostolic commis- 

- sion,—they were the simple but irresistible means by 
which the Church was planted ; and since it was thus 
planted, it has flourished and grown in defiance of the 
same opposition. The grain of mustard seed which 
was once the least of all seeds, has become a great 
tree, overshadowing the best and fairest portion of the 
globe. ‘The stone cut out of the rock, without hands, — 
has become a great mountain, and is fast filling the 
earth. If it had been the,counsel or work of man, it 
must have come to nought; but it was of God, and 
therefore men could not overthrow it. They did their 
utmost. The heathen raged,—the people imagined 
vain things,—the kings of the earth set themselves, and 
the rulers took counsel together, against the Lord and’ 
against his anointed. But he that sitteth in the heavens 
laughed them to scorn ;—the Lord had them in deris- 
ion. The policy of governments failed,—the rage of 
persecution ceased,—and the Church rose up, while 


103 


~ 104 


* 


all other institutions were crumbling into ruin. ‘The 
_ sceptres of monarchs were broken,—their crowns were 
trodden. in the dust,—the names of whole nations 
were blotted from the memory of man,—but the 
Church of Christ stood firm amidst the general desola- 
tion. The laws of other days were buried,—the lit- 
erature of other days was banished,—the arts and 
sciences of other days were forgotten,—Europe was 
plunged for centuries into feudal darkness,—the Jews, 
who crucified the Redeemer, were scattered by the 
Gentiles, and the Gentiles, who once opposed the 
religion of God, were forced, in turn, to bow down to 
the savage hordes of the North, and every trace of 
refinement and social elevation, withered away ; but 
still, the Church remained secure. She conquered 
the conquerors. She converted and softened the fero- 
cious spirit of the Vandal and the Goth ; and the pride 
and fierceness of triumphant barbarism fell prostrate in 
penitence, beneath the cross of Christ. Yea, more than 
all,—the Church grew and flourished in spite of her own 
corruption. Ambition and strife disturbed her ancient 
moderation, and erected a tyrannical hierarchy over 
the kingdom of the Saviour. Her doctrine became 
clouded by the inventions of man,—her worship be- 
came stained by frauds and superstition,—her priest- 
hood excited the general indignation by their vice and 
immorality,—and all things betokened the speedy reign 
of impiety and atheism. But the might of God east 
off the chains of human presumption; the glorious 
reformation restored the scriptural standard of apostolic 
purity, and the Church of Christ was established as the 
pillar and ground of the truth, in all the beautiful 
attire of her primitive simplicity. And still the Church 


105 


advances, notwithstanding the heavy disadvantages of 


sectarian animosity and party zeal. Still the gates of | 
hell cannot prevail against her, notwithstanding the 


combined force of outward assaults and internal divis- 
ions. The Church of Christ is working her way in the 
midst of Mahometanism, and although that system is 
younger by seven centuries, and has been protected by 
the united powers of ignorance and despotism, yet is it 
tottering to its fall. The Church of Christ is diffusing 
her salutary influence among our native Indians, among 
the debased Africans, among the Chinese, and the 
thousand varieties of idolatry which infest the East. 
Her strength increases in every country, hitherto call- 
ed Christian. Her influence is becoming more exten- 


sive in our own land. On the list of her defenders, 


we can number the brightest names of mortal renown, 
in genius, in science, in learning, and in virtue; and 
every human accomplishment, and every trophy of 
intellectual supremacy, have arrayed themselves in 
glad subordination to the principles of the Christian 
faith. | 

What then, we ask once more,—what could have 
achieved this victory, but the power of God? What but 
his wisdom, and his might, could have built his Church 
on the efforts of the poor fishermen of Galilee, and 
preserved, and increased, and prospered it in this mar- 


vellous manner, for eighteen centuries together? God 


knows how little the sagacity or contrivances of men 
could have done, to establish such asystem. God knows 
how imperfectly, at best, his servants have fulfilled their 
duty, and how often their folly, their weakness, and 
their crimes, have retarded and kept down the progress 
of his truth. Yea, and even to this hour, small indeed is 


106 


the share which we can claim, in the triumphs of the 
Gospel. But, considered simply asa question of evi- 
dence, it is better that it should be so; for thus the 
work may be seen, the more plainly, to be divine. ‘ Not 
by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the 
Lord.’ ‘Notunto us; not unto us, O Lord, but unto thy 
name be the glory and praise, for thy mercy and truth’s 
sake.’ pipes: ; 

Let us then, my beloved brethren, render thanks- 
giving and honor to the blessed condescension of the 
Almighty, which has thus erected the Church of the Re- 
deemer, at such a time, and by such instruments, as to — 
place its celestial origin beyond the reach of honest. 
doubt. And let us acknowledge, with humble gratitude, 
_ the unspeakable privilege of having its early history so 
clearly recorded, and its primitive worship and doctrine 
so purely preserved. Let us rejoice that the ministry 
ordained by the Apostles has descended in an unbroken 
succession to our own day. Let us rejoice that the 
sacraments ordained by Christ himself, are still admin- 
istered amongst us in all the pure simplicity of their 
first institution. Let us dwell with increasing affection 
on the sacred writings, addressed to the Churches by 
the very hands which gathered them from the heathen ; 
and let us imbibe a higher portion of their zeal and 
holy fervor with each perusal. And as for those who 
choose the seat of the secorner—the poor unhappy men, 
who love the darkness of scepticism, and the desolation 
of unbelief,—well may we compassionate their blind- 
ness, and deplore their hardness of heart; but to fear 
them would be unworthy of our cause. It is, indeed, 
our solemn duty to defend, yea, if necessary, even to 
contend earnestly for the faith once committed to the 
Saints ; still, we cannot doubt the issue of the contest, 


= 


107 

for this counsel or work is not of men, that it should 
shrink before the assaults of human opposition. It is 
of God, and they cannot overthrow it. But alas! why 
should they expose themselves to the risk of thus fight- 
ing againstGod? For what prize are they contending ? 
What do they gain, even when their cruel sophistry 
has succeeded in poisoning the understandings and de- 
luding the souls of their unsuspecting victims? What 
is the miserable triumph worth, which sears the con- 
science, bursts every moral restraint, and confirms the 
fearful dominion of the passions ; which, at the last sad 
hour, adds tenfold horror to the sting of death, and finds 
no better refuge than the wretched hope that the victory 
of the grave will be eternal? Such is the common re- 
ward of unbelief even in the present life: but O God! 
just, as well as merciful,—engaged as they are in a con- 
test with thee,—what must be the doom which awaits 
them in the life to come! . 

Stand then, my brethren, for the cause of truth, 
against all attacks of infidelity. Stand, as the soldiers 
of Christ, in the blessed armour of the Gospel, with 
the shield of faith, and the breastplate of righteousness, 
having for a helmet the hope of salvation, and girded 
with the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. 
But contend not in the temper of angry controversy, 
for the battle is the Lord’s, and he demands of us the 
spirit of meekness and holiness, the spirit of supplication 
and prayer, the spirit of benevolence and affectionate 
solicitude for the souls of all men. May his grace guide 
and direct you! May his truth be your defence and 
your stay, and may the power and energy of a living 
faith so operate in your hearts and lives, that his Church 
on earth may lead you to his Church in heaven! 


fee 
x 
b 


ih DIFEOURSE VI: 
te oe nun 
At DanTeRIMe., 5142 toate ae 
THE MN ine BY WISDOM KNEW NOT Gop. » ’ . 

‘Tue Aceaae, of Christianity, my bichiifen, is under 
no inducement to pass over or disguise the arguments 
of its assailants. Strong in the celestial truth and jus- 
tice of his cause, he ey not any of the arts ‘of advyo- 
cacy 5 nor outa the principles which he professes. to 
espouse, tolerate an advantage gained at the expense 
of candor. We deem it, therefore, an obvious duty, 
to notice formally the remaining objections of the most 
prominent infidel. writers, before we conclude these 
discourses on the evidence of the Christian faith. Our 
limits will not admit of our entering much into detail, 3 
_ but substantially, though briefly, we hope to dispose cf 
all the supposed reasons which our adversaries offer in 
their justification ; confident that the fault must be our 
own, if we do not shew how weak and futile they de- 


serve to be esteemed, by every sound and unsophisti- 


cated understanding. 

“The whole of the argument ie infidelity resolves 
itself into two branches ibe objection, of which the first 
regards | the contents of the Bible itself, the second, the 
conduct of professing Christians. anes us give to both 
a cursory examination. iui 


+a 


109 


The contents of the Bible are assailed on various” 
grounds. 

1. It is said, for example, that the books attributed to 
Moses and Joshua, could not have been written by 
them, because they contain an account of their death. 

2. It is averred, that the Bible cannot be the book 
of God, because it contains some passages which are 


- not consistent with modesty. 


3. It is insisted, that the commands attributed to 
the Almighty, to exterminate the Canaanites, are to- 
tally at war with his attributes of justice and mercy. 

4. It is alleged, that there are many positive con- 
tradictions between the various writers of both Old 
and New Testament, which render their testimony 


unworthy of belief. 


5. And, fifthly, it is assumed, that miracles are opposed 
to all human experience, and are therefore incredible. 
_ Now in all this, the appeal is professedly made to 
nature and to reason; and we desire no better tribunal 
for such a question, if it be only judged with fairness 
and candor. We donot, indeed, intend to notice 
every distinct passage which has been made the topic 
of infidel jest, because this would require a volume. 
Neither would it avail; for as jests are not arguments, 
itis idle to ask that argument should answer them. 
Woe to the mind that mistakes the laugh of skepticism, 
for the test of religious truth! Still, though we do not 
design to parley with the man who prefers profane wit 
to sober reason, we hold ourselves bound to exhibit 
plain and practical principles, by which all the above, 
and similar objections, can be put to rest by the sincere 
enquirer. To none other do we expect that any ar- 


gument would be satisfactory. 
10 


110 


~ 1. We commence with the allegation, that Moses and 
ie could not have been the writers of the books 
attributed to them, because those books contain an ac-~ 
count of their death, at the close; and this is dwelt 
upon as a serious matter, although the slightest reflec- 
tion might serve to remove the difficulty. We grant 
very readily, that Moses and Joshua did not write 
the account of their own deaths, but that it was 


added by some other hand, probably the High Priest 


at the time being, as a part of the sacred history. And 
what then? Does this brief addition at the end of the 
fiye books of Moses, affect his claim to be considered 
as the writer of the rest? Does the adding of notes 
or explanations in the margin, or in brackets, or at the 
end of books in our own day by an editor, destroy the 
i claim of the original author? As readily do we grant 
that we do not aegane the writers of many other books 


of the Old Testament; but how would it increase our 


confidence in their truth, if we did? Is 1t not enough 
for us, that they were admitted in their present shape 
by the ancient Jews, for centuries before the coming 
of our Saviour,—that they formed their sacred history, 
their constitution of government, and their laws,—and 
that they were transcribed with the utmost accuracy, 
preserved with the highest care, inspected by all their 
priesthood and publie officers, and not allowed to be 
copied or expounded, except under the strictest rules 
and regulations? And thus -eireumstanced, is it not 
plain, that whatever explanatory or additional matter 
was at any time admitted, was authorized by their Pro- 
phets, and therefore possesses the same claim to our 
veneration? The Jews, who have the first right to 
speak on such a point, refer these and a small list of 


Ia A ee 


111 


other supplementary passages to Samuel and Ezra, and 


substantiate their authority by the fact, that they were 
admitted into the Hebrew Canon; and the Christian, 
besides this ample testimony, derives a conclusive ar- 
gument from the circumstance, that Christ Jesus and 
his Apostles continually appeal to the Scriptures in 
their present form as the infallible record of divine 
revelation,—thus solemnly authenticating the truth of 
the whole. 

But the infidel overlooks every principle of reason 
and experience, when he talks of the probability of 
forgery and imposition, in the production or transcribing 
of these Scriptures. Who ever heard that the laws and 
constitutions of a whole nation had been forged by 
deceit, altered by stealth, or corrupted by private man- 
agement? The thing is impossible. And for this very 
reason it is, as we may reverently conceive, that the 
Scriptures of the Old Testament were of so mingled a 
character, presenting at one view not only the history 
of Israel, and their religion, but their code of civil 
government, so singularly combined together, that it 
was impracticable to separate them, and equally im- 
practicable to keep them from the knowledge, not 
merely of the priests, but also, of the judges and the 
people at large. To the books of Moses the Levites 
were obliged continually to recur, as the foundation of 
their whole system, settling their duties to the other 
tribes, and the duties of those tribes to them. To the 
same books the judges of all Israel were obliged to 
have the same constant recourse, as the code of law 
which decided every dispute, and determined every 
controversy. To the book of Joshua the whole na- 
tion had special regard, because the boundary lines of 


_. the allotment to the several tribes were recorded 


112 


there. And hence it is plain, that the gratuitous sup- 
position of fraud in the production or the preservation 
of these writings is the most preposterous and wild. 
As well might men talk of the admission of forgery or 
unauthorized additions in the Constitution of the Union, 
or the laws of the land; or persuade us, that the le- 
gislative divisions of our states into counties and 
townships were a piece of private or priestly imposi- 
tion. To the Israelites, the books of Moses and 
Joshua stood in this precise relation. They were the 
great national records not only of their history, but of 
their constitution and their laws; and the division of 
Canaan amongst the twelve tribes depended on their 
authority. And when it is remembered that the peo- 
ple of the Jews, at the time of their departure from 
Kigypt, were more numerous than the inhabitants of 
any one of the United States, surely a refusal to 
place credit in their records, which combined all that 
was most dear to them, in history, polity, and religion, 
is utterly opposed to every dictate of common sense. 
Neither is the objection, that we do not know the 
authors of the supplementary additions or notes to 
these books, of any weight, in the proper aspect of the 
question, for this simple reason, viz., that in the public 
records of the history, laws, and constitution of nations, 
authorship has no necessary connexion with truth. 
Who knows the author of the English Magna Charta, 
or Bill of Rights? Of what importance is the enquiry, 
whether the American Declaration of Independence 


were the work of one man or of twenty?) Or how 


does it concern us, to know ,the actual writer of any 
of the charters or constitutions of the several states, or 
the actual proposer of any of our acts of legislation ? 


vy 
i 


* 


113 


Here, therefore, we see a plain distinction, which any 
mind of sense and reflection can easily perceive. The 
question of authorship is undoubtedly important in pri- 
vate books, because in such case, without some name 
there is no personal responsibility. But in public 
records—in the acts or archives of nations, authorship 
is nothing but a point of curiosity. Our confidence 
in these is not founded on the personal responsibili- 
ty of any individual, but on the recognition of the 
government ; and hence, if there be any principle in 
evidence universally established amongst men, it is 
this, that the records of nations, laid up and recognized 
by their existing governments, are above all other 
proof, and do not, in their nature, admit of any equal 
demonstration. 

2, We proceed to the E soxdl head of objection, that 
the Bible contains many passages unworthy of the 
character of the Deity, as being inconsistent with 
modesty. This supremely contemptible cavil, hardly 
deserves a reply. Modesty, in the sense used by the 
objector, has no connexion with the task of the law- 
maker or the judge on earth. Crimes must be de- 
scribed or they cannot be punished. Testimony of 
their commission must be given or they cannot be de- 
tected. And would the sickly and mawkish affectation 
of infidel modesty check the law of the Most High 
God in describing and forbidding iniquity, while the 
laws of men, and the administration of them is to be 
unrestrained? Is the record of the Divine will to be 
fettered, while the record of the human legislator is 
to be free? Truly these profound caviliers would do 
well to petition our own law-makers to cut down the 


statute book to the standard of this modest legislation, 


10* 


114 


and expurgate all the histories of ite world, and blot 
out of our dictionaries a large proportion of our lan- 
guage, and let vice and debauchery stand unreproved, 
lest a wound might be inflicted on their sensitive deli- 
cacy. But no! These gentlemen have no objections 
to describing things as they are, except when they 
think it may serve their turn in vilifying the Bible. 
Their modesty is under no alarm when books and con- 
versation, poetry and music, sculpture and painting, 
and all the inflaming and meretricious arts of the 
drama, are at work to excite the fancy and corrupt 
the heart. But let them set their minds at rest, by 
this simple reflection,—-That is the most modest book, 
which makes the readers of it modest. And in vain 
will they look for this or any other pure and chaste 
quality on earth, if they do not find it in those who 
are the constant and faithful students of the book of 
Gon" (i 
3. The next-cavil which meets us, is the allegation, 
that the command given to exterminate the Canaanites, 
is totally at war with the justice and mercy of the 
Almighty,—women and children being sacrificed by 
the Israelites, and they being forbiddaa! either to pity 
or to spare. Now let us bring this favorite accusation 
to the test of reason, and let us ask, what is. ‘the usage 
adopted in human wars, and the command given by 
human governments, against those who are the public 
enemies, or those who violate their laws? 
If women and children be, as they frequently are, on 
board an enemy’s ship, does that form an argument 
why she’should not be destroyed : > If women and chil- 
dren be, as they always are, in a besieged town, does 
that prevent the assault by artillery, the scattering 


115 


bomb-shells amongst the houses, the blowing them up 
by a mine, or the reducing it by famine, although in 
all these cases the war is as much directed, in fact, 
against the women and children as against the men ? 
Nay, in any instance, is it possible that war can be 
carried on without injuring the women and children, 
and often to a degree infinitely worse, to a mind of 
any virtue, than death itself? And yet, do the sufferings 
of these women and children ever enter into the cal- 
culations of earthly governments, or was sympathy for 
them ever yet known to arrest the voice or palsy the 
arm of national retribution? Alas! how much is it to 
be lamented, that the philanthropy—like the modesty 
of the infidel, should be found in such active exercise 
only when he inveighs against the Bible ! i 
But this is not the worst of the unbeliever’s incon- 
sistency. In one instance of the Jewish wars, it is re- 
corded by the sacred historian, that it pleased the Al- 
mighty to order the virgins of Midian to be spared ; 
and behold ! the infidel triumphs in the discovery, that 
these maidens were to be the instruments of vice, and 
brings this as another charge against the Scriptures. 
Here we see the ingenious double-dealing of such 
--minds. When God commands the women to be kept 
alive, they invent an evil design and exclaim, How 
abominable! And when he commands them to be slain, 
they are equally offended and cry out, How cruel! 
So that they are determined the Bible must be wrong, 
let it record what course it may. 
- We may not dismiss this topic, however, without 
placing it in its plainest and most simple light. The 
-Canaanites were an abandoned, flagitious, and horribly 
depraved people. In the strong language of the sa- 


a6 


cred record, the very ad had! become sick of its 
inhabitants, ait the Israelites were commissioned by 
the express command of the Almighty Sovereign, to 
destroy them, for this reason and no other. Will the 
infidel presume to say, that God was not just in cutting 
off such a people by any instrument which he saw 
fit to employ? Suppose he had done it by a deluge 
as of old,—would the waters have spared the women 
and children? Suppose he had done it by pestilence,— 


would the plague have spared the women and children ? 


Suppose he had done it by famine, or by lightning,— 
would these have spared the women and the children ? 
In the year A. D. 79 the city of Herculaneum was bu- 
ried by lava and ashes in an eruption of Mount Vesu- 
vius ; andin 1755 the city of Lisbon was desolated by 
an earthquake, by which thirty thousand lives were 
destroyed asinamoment. Did these messengers of the 
wrath of God make any discrimination in the age or sex 
of their victims? Nay, does not the Supreme Goyern- 
or cut off women and children by death, every day? 
And will the infidel deny the agency z God in the 
whole system of earthly things, for the sake of sus- 
taining this miserable affectation of sympathy, 1 in op- 
position to the Bible? : 

Plain therefore it is, that the command to na 


all the Canaanites, on account of their horrible wick-. 
edness, was only in consistency with what we know 


of all the other judgments of God ; and the only question 


that can be raised, is—-Whether it was not merciful in | 


him. to appoint the chosen people as his instruments, 
rather than the flood, or the famine, or the plague, or 
the earthquake, for the express reason which he him- 
self assigns, viz., to teach them a lesson of admonition 


117 


against the same crimes, lest his indignation should 
visit them also. The principle here is precisely the 
‘same with that which earthly governments adopt, 
when they direct the rebel or the murderer to be 
executed by the officer of the law as a warning to the 
community. And if it be right that the sheriff should 
execute his guilty and condemned fellow-being, at the 
voice of an earthly judge, how should it be otherwise 
than right, that a nation should destroy a guilty and 
condemned people, at the voice of the Eternal Judge 
of earth and heaven? 

4. In the fourth place, however, the infidel tells us 
that the Bible cannot be the truth of God, because it 
is full of contradictions. In proof of this assertion, he 
appeals to many passages both of the Old and the New 
Testament, where the same event is related in differ- 
ent ways ; and this variety he is pleased to call contra- 
diction. But this argument is as destitute of fairness 

-and common sense, as any of the others. So far is it 
. from being the fact that several persons, telling the 
game story, will always tell it the same way, if it be 
true, that we defy the most ingenious infidel to tell. the 
same story twice in the very same words, unless he 
writes it down and commits it to memory for the 
express purpose. We care not who tries the experi- 
ment, or when, or how often. Any man that pleases 
may take any domestic or public narrative, and tell it 
every day in the same week, or even six times in the 
same day, and we aver, that however true it may be, 
and however truly he may state it, yet he will not re- 
late it twice in precisely the same manner. Much 
more when different persons relate the same event or 
conversation, may they be expected to vary in their . 


SE 


118 


language, yet without any disagreement which amounts 
to contradiction. And hence the familiar experience 
of courts of justice, that where a number of witnesses 
give their testimony concerning the same fact, they 
never fail to represent it differently, unless where they 
are perjured, or take their lesson from each other. 
Neither are men ever held to precise verbal accuracy, 
even in citing the sentiments of others in books, unless 
when they profess to quote the very words, either by 
the use of quotation marks, or by stating this to be 
their intention. It is absurd, therefore, and in the 
teeth of all human usage and analogy, to ask this ver- 
bal accuracy in the Bible. Variety we ought to ex- 
pect there, as in all the other works of the same divine 
hand. kere cannot be found two expressions of 
Almighty power in the human race, precisely similar 
in mind, face, or person, since the creation. There 
cannot be found even two leaves precisely alike, on 


the same tree. And greatly should we,lose, instead . 


of gaining, if we had the dull and mechanical uniformi- 
ty for which the infidel. contends, instead of the beau- 


tiful and harmonious variety which characterizes the 


works of God, not only in the book of Grace but in 
the book of nature. 

While we acknowledge, therefore, ond are grateful 
for this variety, we utterly repel the charge of contra- 
diction. It needs but very little effort to shew, that 
all which is called contradiction in the Scriptures can 
be easily reconciled, so as to stand perfectly together. 
Our limits will not alin of our entering at large into 


this topic, but we shall state one example which may 


serve as a rule for, Manye) ju: 
In the genealogy of our Saviour, which is given both 


119 

by St. Matthew and St. Luke, there is a striking dis- 
crepancy, furnishing a favorite theme for the despisers 
of the Gospel. Both of these lists commence with 
Joseph, that of St. Matthew calling him the son of 
Jacob, and that of St. Luke saying that he was of 
Heli, omitting the word ‘son’; and here, exclaims the 
infidel in triumph, is a complete contradiction, for 
how can any man have two fathers—how ean Jo- 
seph be the son of Jacob and of Heli too? These sa- 
gacious gentlemen needed only to have reflected upon 
the most common thing in the world, to have answered 
their own objection. And that is the simple fact, that 
every married man has two fathers,—one his proper 
father, the other the father of his wife, otherwise call- 
ed his father-in-law... And as it was the invariable 
custom of the Jews never to insert the names of fe- 
males in their genealogies, therefore St. Luke sets 


_ down the name of Mary’s father, who had by marriage 


become Joseph’s father likewise, and so pursues the 
line of descent belonging to the mother of our Lord, 
in order to prove that whether the genealogy, was 
reckoned to Joseph or to Mary,—whether according 
to the legal or the actual descent,—still the Redeemer 
was the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Judah, 

through David the King of Israel, according to the 
Prophets. Alas! that the dukevintied hostility of un- 
belief should imagine itself justified by a difficulty, 
which it needs so very little knowledge and reflection 
to do away! | 

5. We come, next, to the last general objection to 
the Bible, which is the famous sophism of David Hume, 
that miracles are opposed to all human experience, 
and are therefore not to be believed on the strength 


120 


of human testimony, because it is much more probable 
that men should lie, than that God should interrupt 
the order of nature. This celebrated absurdity only 
requires a little calm examination in order to demon- 
strate its total unreasonableness. That we may con- 
sider it fairly, let us ask first, what is the probability 
of the miracles recorded in Scripture, and next, what © 
sis the experience to which the infidel philosopher ap- 
peals. : . 

As to the probability of the miracles recorded in | 
Scripture, how should any man be so dishonest as to, 
state it only as an enquiry, whether it was more likely 
that men should lie, or that God should work a mira- 
ele? The fair and candid reasoner regards the miracles, 

- not as they are in themselves, but as they stand connect- 
ed with the general purpose of the divine revelation ; 
and therefore the true question is this, whether it is 
more likely that God should create men for the pur- 
pose of directing and guiding them to. happiness by 

© the communication of his own will, or that he should 
create them for no end whatever, beyond the trifling 
occupations, and toils, and miseries of three score years 
and ten,—whether it is more reasonable to think that 
the Almighty takes an interest in the creatures of his 
power, and designs to make them pure, holy, and 
blessed beings, or whether he cares nothing for us, re- 
gards us not, and delivers us to all the disorders of 
body and of soul which we see and feel, without con- 
descending to hold any communion with us, or to lead 
us into any knowledge by which we may rise above 
the evils of our present lot, into a more exalted condi- 
tion. Now we hold the probability of this question to 
be altogether against the infidel hypothesis. Yea, we 


tif 


121 


hold it to be so fax from probable, that the great and 
glorious God who made us, would leave us destitute 
of the knowledge of his will, that the very first thing 
which we should expect, after the creation of a being 
such as man, would be a revelation imparting a knowl- 
edge of his creator. 

But there is another mode of stating the probability 
of the question, which in all justice belongs to it, 
although it is carefully put out of sight in the delusive 
sophistry of Hume. Christianity is established ;—that 
is not to be denied. The Church is extended far and 
wide ;—infidelity itself cannot gainsay that proposition. 
Now how did it thus take possession of the world? 
Is it more unlikely that God should work miracles in 
support of his own truth, than that a handful of igno- 
rant fishermen should ncn such a work by lies and 
imposition, only for the singular pleasure of dying as 
martyrs to their own fraud? Is not the tendency of 
the Gospel holy, just, and good? Is it not expected 
to improve the human character, wherever it is sin- 
cerely professed? Does it not inculcate the purest, the 
most benevolent, the most endearing, the most exalt- 
ed morality ?. And is it more likely that the Apostles 
should have invented and propagated such a system as 
this, in the midst of falsehood and imposture,—that | 
they should have lived in vice in order to teach virtue, 
and committed forgery in order to inculcate truth,— 
is all this more probable than that God, the merciful 
and good, should have commissioned them to promul- 
gate his will amongst his creatures? So far from it, 
that all the probabilities of the question are on the 
other side, and nothing seems to my mind more absurd 
as well as unfair, than the infidel’s mode of presenting _ 


the question. 
11 


122 


We wish not, however, to recapitulate an argument, 
which was exhibited in its proper place; and, there- 
fore we proceed to Mr. Hume’s statement that expe- 
rience is opposed to miracles. But in order to under- 
stand him, we must first ask, what does he mean by 
this word experience? Does he mean his personal 
experience, or the experience of the world for the 
previous sixteen hundred years, or the experience of 
the world since the beginning? If he means that he 
has never seen any miracles, we willingly believe him ; 
but what has that to do with Christianity ? The Bible, 
we apprehend, does not assert that the miracles of 
Christ were exhibited to David Hume ; so that here, 
at least, he cannot allege any contradiction. If he 
means that the experience of the world for the last 
sixteen hundred years, has seen nothing of the kind, 
this may also be true, but it has just as little to do 
with the enquiry as he other. 


But if he means that the experience of the ercaulel 


from the beginning is opposed to miracles, it is plain 
that he begs the whole question, and takes the very 
thing for granted which is inissue. In this sense of the 
term, experience, we deny the proposition altogether, 
and assert the direct reverse. The experience of the 
world from the beginning is in favor of miracles. All 
nations have believed in them. All classes of men 
have believed in them. And although there have 
been many false pretensions of the kind, just as there are 
many false gods, yet this fact only serves to show that 
there must have been some real miracles, or else there 
~ would have been no false ones, for what should have 
~ induced mankind to imitate what did not exist? If the 
Deity had never manifested his power in this way, how 


Be 
7 


123 


should the first idea of it have been introduced into 
the world? Surely it is manifest that the making of a 
counterfeit always pre-supposes the existence of what 
is real. But just as the misconceptions and deceits 
of evil men distorted the being of the only living God 
‘into the phantoms of superstition and idolatry, in like 
manner the same misconceptions and deceits gave rise 
_ toa spurious imitation of the wonders wrought by the. 
Deity, and thus deluged the world with false mira- 
cles. On this particular subject, a partial experience 
leads to contradictory results; but .when taken in its 
largest sense, and properly: compared and corrected, 
the same human experience which testifies against 
false gods and false miracles, testifies in favor of the 
true God, and of the wonders wrought by the commis- | 
sioned messengers of his will. 

Specious, therefore, as it is, the understandings of 
men were never duped ‘by a more egregious fallacy 
than this celebrated sophism of Mr. Hume. Experi- 
ence can be but of two kinds, first our personal expe- 
rience, or what we have actually witnessed ourselves, 
and secondly, the experience of others, or what the 
rest of mankind say that they have witnessed. If we 
resolve to believe nothing that we have not seen, to 
what miserable limits will our knowledge be reduced! 
The accounts of travellers—the descriptions of geo- 
_ graphy—the records of history—the discoveries of sci- 
ence—the political events of the day—the administra- 
tion of government, and the trials of our courts of just- 
ice,—yea, the whole conduct of life—all rest on the same — 
principle—reliance on human testimony. Take away 
our confidence in testimony, and society would be 
unhinged, and the whole frame of the community 


124 | 


would be razed to its foundation. David Hii might 
profess what he pleased, but neither he nor any other 
man was ever so insane as to attempt to practise on 
his system of skepticism. But if, on the other hand, 
we admit the testimony of our fellow men as to what 


we have not seen, (which we all do, of necessity, in — 


order to obtain a view of the whole circle of expe- 
rience,) we are bound in justice to remember, that 
through human testimony only, could our knowledge 
have been acquired. Hence it is manifest that the 
attempt to set experience against testimony,. is like 
setting an effect against its cause, or a stream against 
its fountain. ‘The experience of which the infidel 
philosopher speaks so confidently, is nothing but a 
limited portion of the history of mankind. But the 
facts of history are known to us only by the same 
channel of human testimony, so that the entire process 
is but a balancing of evidence after all. The whole 
_ that can be said with truth is, that the testimony of 
any thing extraordinary requires to be of extraordina- 
ry strength, and that’a just proportion should always 
be demanded between the force of the proof and the 
nature of the proposition. “Had Hume contented 
himself with saying this, he would have said what is 
reasonable ; and no Christian would have been disposed 
to controvert it. The evidences of Christianity shrink 
not from the utmost rigor of any rational rule ; for the 
establishment of the Church in the hands of the fish- 
ermen of Galilee, and its astonishing extension through 
the world, are ner conclusive to prove that the 
work was of God; and the sublime and glorious de- 
sign of this religion—the purifying the human heart 
on earth, in order to fit it for eternity in heaven,—fully 


m4 


a %% : Vise 
1A 
“ i 


125 


justifies us in the assertion that the miracles of Christ- 
ianity are as worthy of the power, as the doctrines of 
Christianity are worthy of the wisdom and goodness 
of the Almighty. Dig 

We come, in the last place, to the main objection of 
the infidel against our sacred religion, namely, the lives 
of professing Christians. And here, our adversaries 
‘never omit to charge upon the Gospel, all the persecu- 
tions—the pious frauds—the hypocritical formalism— 
the sanctimonious wickedness—and the ecclesiastical 
abuses—which stained more especially the dark ages of 
Europe. The inquisition, and the torture, and the 
stake,—the religious wars, the extravagant fanaticism, 
and the wild excesses of various enthusiasts,—also 
come/in for their share ; and the unprincipled intrigues 
and shameless immoralities fastened by historians upon 
the Church of Rome, are not forgotten. But we ask 
the adversary of the Christian religion to say whether 
he can condemn those horrible corruptions more 
strongly than the precepts of the Gospel condémn 
them. We ask whether the infidel philosopher can 
imagine a loftier standard of human purity and virtue,: 
than that which is enjoined in the precepts and ex- 
ample of Christ? And we aver, that instead of his — 
professed disciples having committed these enormities 


_ because they understood their religion, they committed 


them because they understood it not. On the other 
hand, millions, since the fall, have been reclaimed from 
vice by its pure and holy influence ; and never yet has 
it been seen, that the Christian portion of any com- 
munity was not superior, in all the moral virtues, to 
the portion which rejected Christianity. Indeed what 
absurdity was ever greater than the allegation, that 
guilt should be caused by a system of doctrine which 
1 * 


126 


inculcates a total reformation, which demands a con- 
stant effort- to imitate the character of God manifest 
in our nature, which promises, as the reward of our 
faith and obedience, the pardon of sin and the admis- 
sion into celestial glory, which preaches the necessity 
of kindness, forgiveness, and every gentle virtue, which 
forbids intemperance, strife, licentiousness, and°every — 
vice, and denounces eternal clevsiadabiihes on all who love * 
and practice iniquity ? That such a system could ever 
produce crime or be the incentive to evil, is an accusa- 
tion so absurd, that it recoils with shame upon the head 
of him who makes it. It is indeed true that there has 
been far too little of the spirit of Christianity among 
those who have borne the Christian name. That 
the transgressions and inconsistencies of the professed 
disciples of the Saviour have always caused his ene- 
mies to blaspheme, is equally true. But God forbid 
that we should seek to lighten the burden of our re- 
proach, by shifting any part of it upon the religion of 
the Redeemer. Let the infidel defame us as much as 
he will, but let the Gospel be justified, nor let. the 
truth of heaven be traduced, on account of the de-. 
pravity of men. 

Still, my beloved brethren, although the enn 
of the endl on this point a equally unreasonable 
and unfair,—although he has a far better right to 
blame the laws of the land because our citizens 
do not always obey them, than he has to lay the sins of 
mankind at the door of that holy religion which forbids 
all sin, and exhorts us to all that is pure, honest, love- 
ly, and of good report,—still let the accusation, false 
as it is, stimulate us all to the greater watchfulness 
and zeal, lest the Saviour be wounded in the house of 
his friends, by our inconsistent life and conversation. 


of its truth ;—we do utterly deny that a heart, honest- 


127 


And may we, by the blessed influence of the Holy 
Spirit, through the precious atonement of the great 
Redeemer, be enabled to behold the argument which 
is now drawn from the worldliness of the Church 
against religion, converted into one of its best recom- 
mendations, by the causing our light so to shine before 
men that they may see our good works and be led to 
glorify our Father in heaven. 

And now, my brethren, we shall conclude our series 
of discourses on the external evidences of Christianity, 
by reminding you of what has been frequently inti- 
mated before, that while it is proper and necessary 
for the disciples of the great Redeemer to understand 
the general argument which proves the truth of the 
Gospel,.we know too well the nature of unbelief to / 
expect that the objector will be satisfied, or the/ 
caviller convinced, by any intellectual aid that we 
can render him. The real root of the difficulty witk 
the infidel, is a disease. of the heart. A _rebell- 
ious will, a self-righteous complacency, an arrogan 
of mind, an overweening love of the world, or the 
indulgence of the passions—these, or some of then, 
are the usual disqualifications for investigating — 
truth of the Gospel so as to comprehend, and relish, 
and embrace it. That it has its difficulties, we s all 
not deny. What science, even of earthly things 
without them? But we do utterly deny that th 
difficulties have any real bearing upon the evidences 


ly disposed for the search after divine knowledge, 
was ever yet deterred by them. If, then, we wauld 
seek to strengthen our own faith, , or heii in ‘the 
conversion of others, let us look to him who alone 
ordereth the unruly wills and affections of sinful men, 


128 


for his blessing. Let us remember that the most 
convincing argument to the careless and irreligious 
mind, is the spectacle of a pure and consistent exam- 
ple ;—that while controversy has a natural tendency 
to irritate and inflame, to increase the obstinacy of 
prejudice, and rivet the stubbornness of pride, prayer 
will soften, kindness will conciliate, and affection 
will reclaim. We confess that we have small charity 
for the tribe of infidel writers, who, not content with 
their personal skepticism, labor to destroy the faith 
of thousands, and set their miserable strength in open 
warfare against the truth and government of the Most 
High God. We have little compassion for those who 
make a sport of scattering fire-brands, arrows, and 
death throughout society, and take pleasure in defa- 
eing every hope and blasting every expectation which 4 
raises man above the brutes that perish. Butforthose 
vho are in danger of being deluded by their false 
ad treacherous sophistry, our feelings, my Christian 
kethren, should be widely different. For them let ] 
w watch, and strive, and supplicate the God of all 
gace, that they may attain to the knowledge of that 
tnth which is alone able to make them wise unto 
sevation. And may his blessing so guide the course 
ar] prosper the efforts of his people, that they may 
reoice in the extension of pure and undefiled religion, 
anil not only experience its increasing influence with- 
intheir own souls, but behold its constant growth 
anong their friends and brethren, until every domes- 
tic hearth shall have its altar,—until the Word and 
Sprit of the Most High shall govern our country and 
mankind,—until profanity, and vice, and wretchedness 
-\shadl vanish, and the whole earth be filled with his 


glory ! , — 


CONCLUDING DISSERTATION, 


DESIGNED TO EXHIBIT, 


IN A CONNECTED FORM, 


SOME ANNOTATIONS AND PROOFS, | 


WHICH MAY TEND TO ILLUSTRATE 


THE FOREGOING DISCOURSES. 


CHAPTER 1. 


» There are three leading ideas in the first: discourse, 
which seem to demand extraneous support, from the 
writings of others. First, the darkness and uncertain- 
ty which surround our condition without revelation, 
Secondly, the manifest inferiority of the claims of 
Mahometanism, when contrasted with Christianity — 
Thirdly the impossibility of finding, amongst: philoso- 
phers, any safe guide to the knowledge of divine truth. 
A few extracts on each of these points may be accep- 
table to the reader. | 


§ 1. Of the total uncertainty of the mind in its search after 
truth, without’ a revelation. 


In answer to the question ‘Is there any God? Vol- 


_ taire, the prince of modern Deists, plainly asserts that 
‘the idea of a God cannot be necessary to human nature. 


‘T remark,’ says he, ‘ that there are nations who have no 
knowledge of .a Creative Deity. These nations, in- 
deed, are barbarians, and very few in number, but 
nevertheless they are men; and if the knowledge of a 
God was necessary to human nature, the Hottentot 
savages would have as sublime an idea as ourselves of 
a Supreme being. Much more, there is not a child 
amongst the most civilized people, who has in his brain 
the least idea of a God. We impress it upon them 
with difficulty, and they pronounce the word God, often 


132 
in their life without attaching to it any fixed idea.”! 
Could any argument of a Christian writer show, more 
plainly the folly of the phrase ‘religion of nature’? 
Can any admission prove, more conclusively, the ne- 
cessity of a Revelation, to teach ‘us the being and the 


attributes of the Almighty, and the knowledge of his _ 


will? 

The condition of the unbeliever, in his search after 
truth, is thus eloquently deplored by Rousseau. ‘1 
meditated,’ says he, ‘ upon the sad lot of mortals, float- 
ing upon this sea of human opinions, without helm, 
without compass, and delivered to their stormy pas- 
sions, without any other guide than an inexperienced 
pilot, who 1s unacquainted with his way, and who 
knows neither from whence he has come, nor whither 
he is going. I said to myself, I love truth, I seek her 
and cannot recognize her ; let them show her to me, 
and 1 will continue devoted to her. Why does she 
withdraw herself from the emotion of a heart made to 
adore her ?? ‘Although,’ continues this infidel philo- 
sopher, ‘I have often experienced the greatest evils, 
I have never led a life so constantly disagreeable as 
in this period of trouble and anxiety, when wandering 
4 Je remarque, d’abord, qwil y a des peuples qui n’ont aucune 
connaissance d’un Dieu créateur; ces perples, a la vérité, sont 
barbares, et en trés petit nombre ; mais enfin ce sont des hommes ; 
et sila connaissance d’un Dieu était nécessaire a la nature hu- 
maine, les sauvages hottentos auraient une idee aussi sublime que 
nous @un Etre supréme. Bien plus, il n’y a aucun enfant chez 
les peuples policés qui dans sa téte ait la moindre idée d’un Dieu. 
On la leur imprime avec peine; ils prononcent le mot de Dieu 
souvent toute leur wie sans y attacher aucune notion fixe.—Phuilo- 
sophie, V- 1. p- 126. Os aa) 


=: 


pti es 9 ei 


ee! Pe ee 


= 


4 


on 
ed 


bie 


= 


ee 


—, 


re ee a 


133 


without ceasing, from doubt to doubt, I brought back 
from my long meditations nothing but uncertainty, 
obscurity, contradictions upon the cause of my being, 
and upon the rule of my duties.?1 This acknow- 
ledgment of Rousseau is frank, and deeply instructive. 
But even Voltaire, when writing his chapter on vice 
and virtue, was driven to say, ‘Would to God that a 
Supreme Being had indeed given us laws, and had 
proposed to us rewards and punishments! That he 
had said to us—This is vice in itself, this is virtue in 
itself.’ 2 Disguise it, therefore, as they may, these 
out-breakings of internal doubt and distraction shew 
the state of mind under which, at times, these arro- 
gant dictators suffered. How strange that men should 
be influenced by a miserable skepticism, which could 
not satisfy even its public defenders themselves ! 


1 Je méditois done sur le triste sort des mortels flottant sur cette 
mer des opinions humaines, sans gouvernail, sans boussole, et li- 
vrés a leurs passions orageuses, sans autre guide qu’un pilote in- 
expérimenté qui méconnoit sa route, et qui ne sait ni d’ou il vient 
niou ilva. Je me disois: J’aime la vérité, je la cherche, et ne 
puis la reconnoitre ; qu’on me la montre, et j’y demeure attaché : 
pourquoi faut-il qu’elle se dérobe a ’empressement d’un cceur fait 
pour l’adorer ? / 

Quoique j’aie souvent éprouvé de plus grands maux, jen’ai ja- 
mais mené une vie aussi constamment désagréable que dans ce 
temps de trouble. et d’anxiétés, ou, sans cesse errant de doute en 
doute, je ne rapportois de mes longues méditations qu’incertitude, 
obscurité, contradictions sur la cause de mon étre et sur la régle 
de mes devoirs.—Emile, tome 2. p. 139. 


2 Plt au ciel qu’en eftet un Etre supréme nous edt donné des 
lois, nous ett proposé des peines et des récompenses! qu’il nous 


eit dit: Ceci est vice en soi, ceci est vertu en soi.—Philosophie, 
tome. 1. p. 194. 
12 


¥. 


134 


Nor is the wretched choice of the unbeliever re- 
lieved from this gloomy aspect, even in the lucid 
pages of the sophist Hume. For mark the conclusion 
of his researches in the last paragraph of his Natural 
History of Religion. ‘The whole’ says he, ‘is a 
riddle, an enigma, an inexplicable mystery. Doubt, © 
uncertainty, suspense of judgment, appear the only 
result of our most accurate scrutiny concerning this 
subject.?, What should a sober and reflecting mind 
think of the pride of human intellect which could in- 
duce this gifted writer to cast away the light of God’s 
own providing, for the wretched pleasure of floun- 
dering in darkness like this! 

The confession, therefore, of the deists themselves, 
corroborates and fully justifies the description of the 
‘ admirable Pascal, where, speaking of the natural con- 
dition of man, he says ‘ We wish for truth, and find 
nothing in us but uncertainty ; we seek happiness, and 
find nothing but misery. We cannot help longing 
after truth and happiness, and yet we are incapable of 
attaining either. * * * * Man knows not in what rank 
-to place himself. He is visibly astray, and feels in 
himself remnants of a happy state which he has lost 
and which he cannot recover. He seeks every where 
with inquietude and without success, in impenetrable 
darkness.’ ? Such, of a truth, is the condition of 


BGR ICT DeLee AUN IS Pl Nn ERTS a 


1 Nous souhaitons la vérité, et ne trouvons en nous qu’incerti- 
tude. Nous cherchons le bonheur, et ne trouvons que misere. 
Nous sommes incapables de ne pas souhaiter la verité et le bon- 


heur, et nous sommes incapables et de certitude et de bonheur, 
’ p 
x x % % * % % 


L’homme ne sait a quel rang se mettre. II est visiblement 
égaré, et sent en lui des restes d’un état heureux, dont ilést déchu, 


= 


135 


La 
‘the wisest and most sagacious mortals when they cast 
aside the truth of the Redeemer’s system, in order to 
have the miserable liberty of constructing their own. 
No wonder that ‘ the wisdom of the world is foolish- 
ness with God ’ 


° 


§ 2; Of the comparative claims of the Mahometan religion. 
? 


It is alleged in the first discourse, that Mahomet 
received all that is good in his system from the Bible. 
A few extracts from the Koran will fully demonstrate 
this assertion, from his own acknowledgments of 
Scripture. 

For example, Mahomet thus expostulates, in the 5th 
chapter of the Koran, (page 95 of the Baltimore edition, ) 
“ O ye that know the written law, if ye observe not 
the Old Testament, the Gospel and Scriptures which 
God hath sent unto you, ye shall be without merit. 
The Jews, Samaritans, and Christians, all that have. 
believed in God, the resurrection of the dead, and 
have done good works, shall be exempt from affliction ; 
there is nothing for them to fear at the day of judg- 
ment.” 

Again, speaking in the person of God, as delivering 
an express message from him, Mahomet says,—(chap- 
ter 2nd. )‘¢ We inspired knowledge into Jesus the son of | 
Mary, and strengthened him by the Holy Ghost.” 

Again, (chapter 3. p. 49,) “(Remember how the 
Angels said to Mary, God declareth unto thee a word, 
from which shail proceed the Messiah named Jesus, 


By Aaah ey Rem es OS Nk ID 38 sa 


et qu’il ne peut recouvrer. I) cherche partout avec inquietude et 
sans succés dans des ténébres impenetrables.—Pensees de Pasc. 
tome, 2. p. 8, 9. 


136 


the son of Mary, full of honor in this world, and that 
shall be, in the other, of the number of intercessors 
with his divine majesty,” &c. | . i, | 

Again, (chapter 5.p. 100,) ‘Jesus saidtothe children __ 
of Israel, I come to you with evident signs of my ‘ 
mission from your Lord.—I will heal them that are 
born blind, and the leprous. I will raise the dead. I 
am come to confirm the Old Testament,’’&c. 

With these plain acknowledgments of the general 
truth of the Bible, Mahomet shews an astonishing 
perversion of its language in places innumerable. His f 
strange travesty of the birth of Christ,(ch. 19,) his 
accounts of the future world, (ch. 22, ch. 37, and ch. 
56,) his notions of Satan’s fall, (ch. 15,) and of David 
and Solomon, (ch. 34,) with very many other examples, 
might be adduced to prove either that he had studied 

“the Seriptures with very little care, or under the 
‘influence of the strongest self delusion. But we shall 
state two instances only, as a specimen of this perver- 
sion. In chapter 4, speaking of the death of Christ, he 
uses this language :—‘ they said” (sc. the Jews) “¢ we 

have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son'of Mary. Cer- 
tainly they slew him not, neither crucified him; they 
crucified one amongst them, that resembled him.” 
* Again, (ch. 4,) “The Messiah Jesus,” saith he, “ is 
a Prophet and an Apostle of God, his word and spirit, 
, which he sent to Mary. Say not there be three Gods. 
For there is but one God. Praised be God, he hath no 
Son. Again, (ch. 5,) ‘¢ Certainly he that saith Jesus 
is God, is impious.” Again, (ch.6,) “ How should he 
have a Son, who hath no wives??? The confounding 
the doctrine of the Christian Trinity, with the belief of 
three Gods, demonstrates the ignorance of Mahomet, 


1s — LPL = 


137 


and the grossness of the idea on which the last cited 
ar gument is founded, exhibits his characteristic sensu- 


| ality of wddhensiot \ 


One of the many passages, in which he excuses his 
Waionty in miraculous powers, we cite from chapter 
3d. ‘There be that say, God hath commanded us not 
to believe Prophets, until their sacrifice be consumed 
by fire. Say to them, there came to you Prophets 


heretofore, with miracles that you demanded; you had 


not slain them, had you been righteous. If they belie 
thee, know they belied the Prophets that were before 
thee, that came with miracles and the book of light.” 
See also on the same point, ch. 10. ch.13. ch. 21. ch. 28. 
We add a few extracts to shew that Mahomet relied 
for his suecess upon the sword of slaughter, and that 
throughout, the Koran preached, not peace, good will , 
to men,but warand blood-shed. Thus, (ch. 2,) he says, 
‘Fight for the law of God against them that assault 
you. Fighting is enjoined you, though it be against your | 
will. ‘To such as believe in God, fight for the faith 
and hope for his mercy, he is gracious. > Again,(ch. 3, Ai 
*¢ Do you believe to enter fididadtel and that God know- 
eth not them that fought gallantly. If you die or be 
slain fighting for the faith, you shall ee neers his 
divine Majesty to be rewarded.” , 
To confirm this code of sanguinary plats. Mahomet 
carried the doctrine of fatalism to the highest point.— 
An example of this we find in ch. 3, of the Koran, 
where he says, ‘“‘ Although you had stayed in your 
houses and your beds, death would have taken away 
them that were arrived at the hour of their destiny.” 
Th e foregoing extracts are sufficient to prove that 


the opinion expressed by Tucker, in his Light of Na- 
12* 


138 


ture, (vol. 4. p. 35,) isnot without reason. ‘‘ We may 
claim Mahometanism,” says he, ‘‘ as a botchy excres- 

cence or spurious offspring of the Gospel: the profes- 
sors of it preserve a great veneration for Isa or Jesus, 
look upon him much in the same light as we do Elias, 
and pretend that their Prophet was the comforter of 
whom we have promise in the Gospel ; their Koran in- 
culeates some of the most important truths contained 
therein, and what there is good in it, was borrowed 
from thence.” Let it be remembered that Tucker was 
no divine; on the contrary, he was a liberal philoso- 
pher. But what shall we think of the honesty or can- 
dor of those minds, who affect to consider Mahometan- 
ism as an independent system, and look upon the 

Koran as a rival to the book of God! 


§ 3. Of the impossibility of finding, amongst philosophers, any 
safe guide to the knowledge of truth. 

.Of the innumerable testimonies to the doctrine of the 
first discourse on this subject, we shall extract a few, 
beginning with the ancient philosophers, whose discor- 
dant sentiments we shall take, for brevity’s sake, from 
the impartial page of Cicero. We quote from the 
Parisian edition of Lallemand, published in A. D. 
1768, and, as in all other cases, we give the original 
below, in order that the scholar may make, if he will, 
his own translation. 

From his ‘ Academicorum,’ (Lib. 1, x11. 44. page 
127,) we transcribe the following, where he speaks of 
the sentiments of Arcesilas, a later academic. “ With 
Zeno, as we understand him,” says he, ‘ Arcesilas, 
prescribed to himself an universal uncertainty, not 
from perverseness, nor from the desire of victory, as 


139 


indeed it seems to me, but from the obscurity of those 
things, which led Socrates to the confession of his 
ignorance, and, before the time of Socrates, Democri- 
tus, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, almost all the ancients, 
who maintained that nothing could be understood, 
nothing could be perceived, nothing could be known ; 
that the senses of men were narrow inlets, that their 
minds were imbecile, that the race of life was short, 
and (as said Democritus) that truth was buried in the 
deep—that all things were held from opinions and es- 
tablished institutions—and nothing was left to truth ; 
in fine that every thing was surrounded with dark- 
ness’”? 

‘¢ Therefore,” continues Cicero, “ Arcesilas denied 
that there was any thing which could be known; * * 
* * * * therefore he maintained that all things lay 
hid in mystery, nor was there any thing’ which could 
be perceived or understood ; from which reasons it 
was not fit that a man should profess any opinion, nor 
affirm, nor approve by assent, but always restrain his 
mind and keep his rashness from every false step. 
Since this rashness of judgment must be great when 
either what is false, or what is unknown, is approved, 


ee NE 


1 “Cum Zenone, inquam, ut accepimus, Arcesilas sibi omne 
certamen instituit, non pertinacid, aut studio vincendi, ut mihi 
quidem videtur, sed eorum rerum obscuritate, que ad confessio- 
nem ignorationis adduxerant Socratem, et jam ante Socratem, 
Democritum, Anaxagoram, Empedoclem, omnes fere veteres: 
qui nihil cognosci, nihil percipi, nihil sciri posse dixerunt ; an gus- 
tos sensus, imbecillos animos, brevia curricula vite, et (ut Demo- 
critus) in profundo veritatem esse demersam ; opinionibus et in- 
stitutis omnia teneri; nihil veritati relinqui; deinceps omnia tene- 
bris circumfusa esse dixerunt.” 


140 


nor is any thing more shameful than that our approba- 
tion and assent should run before our knowledge and 
perception.” * 


To this sect of philosophers, which Cicero says was 


called the New Academy, David Hume professed his 
allegiance. ‘The academics,” he tells us, (Enquiry 
concerning human understanding, § 5,) ‘ always talk 
of doubt and suspense of judgment, of danger in hasty 


determinations, of confining within very narrow bounds. 


the enquiries of the understanding, and of renouncing 
all speculations which lie not within the limits of com- 


mon life and practice. Nothing, therefore, can be- 


more contrary than such a philosophy to the supine 
indolence of the mind, its rash arrogance, its lofty 
pretensions and its superstitious credulity. Every pas- 
sion is mortified by it, except the love of truth, and 
that passion never is nor can be carried to too high a 
degree.” 

“If this panegyric were as true as it is beautiful, it 
would fully justify the choice of the celebrated infidel 
who sought to identify his name with the honors of 
skepticism. But we havea far more correct account 
of that school of philosophy from the shrewd author 
of the “ Light of Nature,” (vol. 4, p. 26 of the Cam- 


1 “Ttaque Arcesilas negabat esse quidquam, quod sciri posset. 
* * % % % * 
Sic omnia latere censebat in occulto; neque esse quidquam, quod 
cerni aut intelligi possit: quibus de causis nihil oportere neque 
profiteri, neque affirmare quemquam, neque assentione approbare ; 
cohibereque semper, et ab. omni lapsu continere temeritatem: 
quee tum esset insignis, quum aut falsa aut incognita res approba- 
retur: neque hdc quidquam ésse turpius, qdam cognitioni et per- 
ceptioni assentionem approbationemque preecurrere.” 


4 


141 


bridge Ed.) where he says, “‘ The latter academics 
were arrant free-thinkers, never having any opinion of 
their own, but combatting every body’s else.—If you 
said snow was white, they would prove you mistaken. 
If you said it was black, they would do as before. If 
you asked what they thought themselves, they would 
answer—they could not tell, for it might be either.” 


But before we close our testimony from Cicero, let . 


us hear him on the subject of the varieties of sentiment 
“amongst the ancient philosophers, on the first princi- 
ple of all religion, viz. the Being of God. “ The 
greater part of philosophers,” says he, (De Natura 
Deorum, lib. 1, § 2,) have said that inele were gods ; 
Protagoras, that he doubted it; Diagoras Melius, and. 
Theodorus Cyreneus, thought that there were none 
at all. But those who declared that there are gods, 
are in such variance and dissention, that only to enu- 
merate their opinions would be a wearisome task.”} 
Proceeding then to give a very brief and masterly 
detail of the doctrines of several of the ancients, he 
says, (ch. 22. §42.) ‘I have set forth not so much 


the judgments of philosophers as the dreams of mad- 


men: for not much more absurd are those things which, 


diffused by the strains of the poets, injure by their ve- 


ry sweetness.” 


1 Plerique * * *° deos esse dixerunt: dubitare se Protago- 
ras, nullos esse omnino Diagoras Melius et Theodorus Cyrenzeus 
putaverunt. Qui verd deos esse dixerunt, tanta sunt in varietate 
ac dissensione, ut eorum molestum sit dinumerare sententias.” 


2 Exposui feré non philosopborum judicia, sed delirantium som- 
nia; nec enim multd absurdiora sunt ea, que, poetarum vocibus 
fusa, ipsd suavitate nocuerunt :—De Nat. Deor. Inb. 1. § 42. 


i oe 


td 


Moe 


142 


But it may be more instructive to take a specimen 
of philosophy from Voltaire, if it be only to see how a 
man may rave ingeniously, with all the advantages and 
blessings of a revelation surrounding him. “ Itis only,” 
says he, ‘‘ by an excess of ridiculous vanity, that men 
attribute to themselves a soul different from that which 
animates the brutes. For it is clear that up to -the 
present moment, neither the philosophers nor I, know 
what is this soul.”? (Philosophie, tome 1, p. 160, 161.) 
Again, ‘‘it is impossible, they say to me, that matter 
should think. I do not see this impossibility.” ( Jb.) 
Again, “ not seeing therefore,”’ says he, “that the un- 
derstanding, the sensation of man, is a thing immortal, 
who will prove tome thatitisso? What! shallI, wit 
do not know the nature of this thing, affirm that it is 
eternal ? and while I refuse immortality to that which 
animates this dog, this parrot, this thrush, shall I grant 
it to man, merely because man desires it ?”? 2 


cae ry 

1 Ce ne peut étre que par un excés de vanité ridicule que les 
hommes s’attribuent une ame d’une espéce différente de celle qui 
anime les brutes. I] est done clair jusqu’A présent que, ni les 
philosophes, ni moi, ne savons ce que c’est que cette 4me.—Phi 
losophie, tome. 1. p. 160, 161. 


Il est impossible, me dit-on, que la matiére pense. Je ne vois 
pas cette impossibilite.—Jb. 


2 Ne voyant donc point que l’intendement, la sensation de 
Phomme, soit une chose immortelle, qui me prouvera qu’ elle Pest P 
Quoi! moi qui ne sais point quelle est la nature. de cette chose, 
jaffirmerai qu’elle est eternelle! moi qui sais que homme n’était 
pas hier, j’affirmerai qu’il y a dans cet homme une partie éternelle 
par sa nature! et, tandis que je refuserai Yimmortalité 4 ce qui 
anime ce chien, ce perroquet, cette grive, je ’accorderai 4 Phom- 
me par la raison que Phomme le desire r—Ib. 166. © 


a 


143 


One would suppose that such a writer, arguing against 
every thing noble and precious in the nature of the 
human race on the strength of what he calls philoso- 
phy, must at least have had a profound respect for the 
intellects of those philosophers who had preceded him. 
But so far is this from being the case of Voltaire, that 
he treats the opinions of nearly all other philosophers, 
with unqualified contempt. Speaking in one place of 
the mode in which our ideas originate, he says, “It is 
here that all the philosophers have made fine roman- 
ces.” ! And again, he tells his readers, ‘If we be- 
lieved that the philosophers had more accurate ideas of 
human nature, we should be greatly deceived, for if 
you except Hobbes, Locke, Descartes, Bayle, anda 
very small number of wise understandings, all the 
others frame to themselves a particular opinion upon 
man, as contracted as that of the vulgar, and only still 
more confused.” ? Now it is worthy of special re- 
mark that of the pieigpophers whom Voltaire excepts, 
as being ‘ esprits sages,’ no two agreed either with him, 
or with each other, on the subject of religion. 

But Rousseau, perhaps the most candid of the melan- 
choly tribe of unbelievers, is eloquent upon the miser- 
able characteristics of the philosophic school. ‘I con- 


1 C’est ici que tous les philosophes ont fait de beaux romans,— 
Philosophie, tome. 1. p. 147. 


2 Si Pon croyait que les philosophes eussent des idees plus com- 
plétes de la nature humaine, on se tromperait beaucoup: car, si 
vous en exceptez Hobbes, Locke, Descartes, Bayle, et un trés petit 
nombre d’esprits sages, tous les autres se font une opinion parti- 
culiére sur ’homme, aussi resserree que celle du vulgaire, et seu- 
lement plus confuse-—Philosophie, tome. 1. p. 120. 


144 ; . 


suited the philosophers,” says he, ‘‘ I ransacked their 
books, I examined their various opinions, I found them 
all proud, dictatorial, dogmatical, even in their pre-_ 
tended skepticism; professedly ignorant of nothing 
yet proving nothing ; each deriding the others, andthig 
last point—common to them all—seemed tome the on- 
ly one on which they were all right. Triumphing a 
when they attack, they are without vigor indefending __ 
themselves. If you weigh their reasons, they have : 
none except for the work of destruction ; if you count : 
the voices, each is reduced to his own; they only agree 
in order to dispute: listening to them was not the way 
to be delivered from my uncertainty °”’ ? i 
Again, says the same author,—-and the confession is 
of the utmost importance to the knowledge of our in- 
tellectual infirmity,—‘‘I conceived that the weakness 
of the human understanding is the first cause of this 
prodigious diversity of sentiments, and that pride is the | 
second; * * * * we are ignorant of ourselves, we 
know neither our nature, nor our active principle— 
impenetrable mysteries surround us on every side; 
they are above the region of our sensation—in order 


1 Je consultai les philosophes, je feuilletai leurs livres, j’exami- 
nai leurs diverses opinions; je Jes trouvai tous fiers, affirmatifs, _ 
dogmatiques, méme dans leur scepticisme pretendue, n’ignorant 
rien, ne prouvant rien, se moquant les uns des autres; et ce point 
commun a tous, me parut le seul sur lequel ils ont tous raison. 
Triomphants quand ils attaquent, ils sont sans vigueur en se de-~ 
fendant. Si vous pesez les raisons, ils n’en ont que pour detruire ; 
si vous comptez les voix, chacun est reduit a la sienne; ils ne 
s’accordent que pour disputer: les ecouter n’etoit pas le moyen de 
sortir de mon incertitude.—Emile, tome 2. p. 140. 


145 


to penetrate them, we think that we have intelligence, 
and we have nothing but imagination.”! 

One extract more, from this writer, and we have 
done. ‘‘If the philosophers,” says he, ‘‘ were in a 
condition to discover truth, who amongst them would 
take any interest in it? Each one knows well that his 
system is not better founded than the others, but he 
maintains it, because it is his own. There is not one 
amongst ee , who, arriving at the knowledge of truth 
and falsehood, would not prefer the lie which he has 
discovered, to the truth discovered by another. Where 
is the philosopher, who, for his own glory, would not 
willingly deceive the whole human race? Where is 
he, who, in the secrecy of his own heart, proposes to 
himself any other object than to distinguish himself ? 
Provided he raises himself above the vulgar, provided 
he eclipses the fame of his cotemporaries, what does 
he ask for more? The essential point in his esteem, 
is to think differently from others. Amongst believers 
he is an atheist, amongst atheists he would be a be- 
liever.’?? 

Such, then, being the opinions of philosophers, on 
the regard due to the sentiments of each other,—such 


1 Je concus que Vinsuffisance de V’esprit humain est la premiére 
cause de cette prodigieuse diversité de sentiments, et que lorgueil 
est laseconde. * * * * Nous nous ignorons nous mémes; 
nous ne connoissons ni notre nature ni notre principe actif; * * 
* * * des mystéres impénétrables nous environnent de toutes 
parts; ils sont au-dessus de la région sensible ; pour les percer 
nous croyons avoir de Vintelligence, et nous n’ayons que de lima- 
gination.— Emile, tome 2. p. 141. 


Quand les philosophes seroient en état de découvrir Ja vérite, 


13 


by 


146 


being their estimate of their own powers, in the dis- 
covery of truth,—such being the endless diversities 
of their schemes, and the bitter hostility which they 
wage against every form of infidelity, except their 
own,—what worse than madness is it to expect them 
to lead their fellow beings, in the path of safety? True, 
indeed, Christians have their differences, but not upon 
first principles. They may vary in minor particulars 
of construction, but they all point with entire unity of 
heart and intellect, to the one infallible director, the 
Revelation of God! They all say, ‘ Believe that re- 
cord—Obey that doctrine—and you are safe.’ They 
all say ‘To the law and to the testimony ; if they 
speak not according to that word, there is no truth in 
them.’ 

RIOR ONE a UT a lr ha la ae 


qui @entre eux prendroit intérét a elle? Chacun sait bien que 
son systéme n’est pas mieux fondé que les autres; mais il le sou- 
tient parcequ’il est a lui. Il n’y ena pas un seul qui, venant a 
connoitre le vrai et le faux, ne préférat le mensonge qu’il a trouve 
4 la véritée découverte par un autre. Ou est le philosophe qui, 
pour sa gloire, ne tromperoit pas volontiers le genre humain? Ou 
est celtii qui, dans le secret de son coeur, se propose un autre objet 
que de se distinguer ? Pourvu qu'il s’éléve au-dessus du vulgaire, 
pourvu qu’il efface Véclat de ses concurrents, que demande-t-il de 
plus? Lvessentiel est de penser autrement que les autres. Chez 
les croyants, il est athée, chez les athées il seroit croyant.—Emule, 


tome 2. p- 141, 


CHAPTER Il. 


——e 


The second discourse is mainly occupied by the 
positive evidence in favor of the Scriptures of the 
New Testament, furnished by writers of the first ages 
of the Church. We propose to present a view of 
these writers, somewhat more in detail, drawn chiefly 
from the work of the elaborate, learned, and faithful 
Lardner. 


§ 1. Of the Christian authors of the second century, who 
flourished immediately after the Apostles. 


1. St. Barnabas, mentioned in the book of the Acts 
of the Apostles, as the fellow laborer of St. Paul, left 
an epistle which is still extant, and in which twenty 
distinct allusions occur to the sentiments and language 
of the Gospels. 

2. St. Clement, bishop of Rome, the same whom 
St. Paul mentions in his epistle to the Philippians, has 
left a piece addressed to the Corinthians. Learned 
men differ in their judgment as to the time of his con- 
secration, some placing it as early as A. D. 61, and 
others not till A. D. 91, or 93. But this last would assign 
the epistle an origin rather more early than the Revela- 
tion of St. John, which is placed A. D. 96. This epistle 
of Clement expressly mentions the epistle of St. Paul, 
where he says, ‘“‘ Take into your hands the epistle of 


148 


the blessed Paul the Apostle ;?”! and it contains forty- 
four passages referring to the other books of the New 
Testament. 

3. Hermas, the same mentioned in the epistle of St. 
Paul to the Romans, is affirmed to be the author of the 
book called the Pastor or Shepherd of Hermas, pub- 
lished as is supposed, A. D.. 92, and read in many of 
the Grecian Churches. This book contains allusions 
to twenty-three of the books of the New Testament, 
in forty-four distinct passages. 

_ 4. St. Ignatius was bishop of Antioch in Syria, in the 
latter part of the first and the beginning of the second 
century, and was a martyr to the truth during the 
reign of Trajan, about A. D. 107. Seven epistles of 
this author are extant, which are generally allowed to 
be genuine, besides others which some reject as spuri- 
ous. He expressly mentions St. Paul’s epistle to the 
Ephesians, and alludes to nearly sixty other passages 
of he New Testament. 

. St. Polycarp was bishop of Smy rna, anda martyr 
in che reign of Marcus Antoninus the philosopher, 
about the year A. D. 169. He addressed a letter to 
the Philippians, which was read in the Churches of 
Asia in the days of St. Jerome, and is extant. In this 
epistle, though short, there are nearly forty references 
to the books of the New Testament, and they are call- 
ed Sacred Scriptures, and ‘ oracles of the Lord.”’ 

6. Quadratus, mentioned with honor by Eusebius, 
was one of those who travelled abroad, preaching 
Christ and delivering the Scriptures of thetdivine Gos- 
pels in the reign of Trajan—about A. D. 112, 


1 Avahabere tyy entgolny te paxcors Havhe te anosoha, 


149 


- %, Papias is also mentioned by Eusebius in such 
wise as to shew that in his time, about A. D. 115, the 
Gospels of Matthew, and Mark, the Acts and many 
other books of the New Testament were well known. 
Nothing from these two, however, has reached our 
times, and therefore, we cannot place them in the list | 
of direct and independent witnesses. 

8. Justin Martyr was a philosopher, converted to 
Christianity about A. D. 132. In 140 he presented 
his first apology to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, then 
went into Asia, where he had the celebrated conference 
with Trypho the Jew, returned again to Rome, and 
addressed his second apology to Marcus Antoninus 
the philosopher, and suffered martyrdom about A. D. 
164. The greater part of these works, with some 
others of the same author, have come down to our 
time. In his first apology he asserts that the Gospels 
were publicly read in the assemblies of the Christians, 
by a person appointed for that purpose. His words 
are these, ‘The memoirs of the Apostles or the wri- 
tings of the prophets are read according as the time 
allows ; and when the reader has ended, the president 
makes a discourse, exhorting to the imitation of so 
excellent things.’ The allusions and quotations inthe 
writings of Justin, in which the New Testament is cited 
or recognized, are very numerous, and embrace portions 
of three of the Gospels, viz. those of Matthew, Luke, 
and John, the Acts of the Apostles, the epistle to the 
Romans, the, first to the Corinthians, the epistles to the 
Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, the 
second to the Thessalonians, the epistle to the Hebrews, 


‘the second of Peter, and the book of the Revelation. 


The author of the epistle to Diognetus, may be taken , 
13* : 


150 


as the next ancient writer who bears testimony to the 
New Testament Scriptures, if, indeed, according to the 
prevailing opinion, this is not one of the works of Jus- 
tin himself. The difference of style is no sufficient 
argument against his claims, for nothing is more com- 
mon than a marked difference of style in the same 
writer, at different periods of life, or under different 
influences of taste or feeling. 

9. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, flourished about 
the year 170. He was the author of several works, 
of which only some fragments preserved. by. Eusebius 
have reached our time. In one of these he speaks of 
the Seriptures of the Lord, as attempted to be corrupt- 
ed by heretics ; and he was the author of an epistle to 
the Nicomedians, in which he opposed the heresy of 
Marcion and defended strenuously the “rule of truth.” 

10. Tatian fiourished about the year 172. He was 
the author of many works, of which his oration against 
the Gentiles is the only one remaining. Im this are 
several references to the Gospels, and he is spoken 
of by many subsequent writers, as having composed 
a harmony on the whole four Gospels. He afterwards 
embraced heretical opinions. 

11. Hegesippus, a converted Jew, flourished during 
the same period. He was a traveller, and wrote five 
books containing a history of the affairs of the Church 
from the death of Christ to his own time, of which 


nothing remains but some fragments preserved by’ 


susebius. One of these, however, bears so interesting 


a testimony to the extension and unity of the Church, | 


that we cannot forbear transcribing it. Speaking of 
his journey from Corinth to Rome, during which he 
visited many bishops, he adds, ‘‘in every succession 


a ae 


ie 


ye, 


151. 


and in every city, the same doctrine is taught, which 
the law and the Prophets and the Lord preached.” 

12. Melito, bishop of Sardis, is placed about the 
year 170. He was the author of several works, of 
which Eusebius gives us the following catalogue. 
Two books concerning Easter: Rules of life, and of 
the Prophets: Of the Church: A discourse of the 
Lord’s Day: Another of the Nature of Man, and of 
his formation: Of the Obedience of the Senses to 


faith: Of the sonl and body, or of the mind: Con- 


cerning Baptism: Of Truth and of Faith, and the 
Generation of Jesus Christ: his Book of Prophecy, 
and of Hospitality: and the Key: and of Satan: and 
the Revelation of John: another book, the title of 
which is doubtful: and his Apology, addressed to the 
Emperor Marcus Antoninus. These books are all 
lost, except a few fragments; but the very titles of 
them prove how well settled the customs of the 
Church, and the Canon of the New Testament must 
have been at that early day. 

13. The next document is of a very interesting 
character; viz. the epistle of the Churches of Vien- 
ne and Lyons, which Eusebius has preserved entire, 
amongst his acts of the martyrs. It gives a most 
affecting and detailed account of a violent persecution 
which raged against the Christians during the reign of 
the last mentioned Emperor, Marcus Antoninus, and 

‘may be referred to the year 177. 

14. St. Irenzeus, bishop of Lyons, succeeded Po- | 
thinus, ( who was a martyr in the last mentioned perse- 
ceution,) and flourished about 170. His work against 


the Gnostics has come down to our time, and is in 
high esteem. In itthe New Testament Scriptures are 


.: 


* 
OZ 


specially particularized. The four Gospels, the Acts 
of the Apostles, 13 epistles of St. Paul, nearly all 
the other epistles, and the Revelation, are copiously 
referred to in the plainest terms. 

15. Athenagoras, an Athenian Philosopher and a 
polite and classic writer, was the author of two pieces 
which have reached our time: an Apology for the 
Christians, addressed to Marcus Aurelius Antoninus 
and his son Commodus, and a treatise on the Resur- 
rection. The period to which these are referred, is 
about the year 177. The doctrines and the books 
of the New Testament are recognized very plainly, 
and to a considerable extent, in those pieces. 

16. Miltiades was a Bhristisn author of the reign of 
Commodus, about the year 180, spoken of by ose ite, 
Tertullian, and Jerome for bine learning and ability, 
and his veal for the divine oracles in his books against 
both Jews and Gentiles.’ No work of his, however, 
has reached our time. : 


17. Theophilus, the sixth bishop of Antioch, suc- 
ceeded Eros in the year 168. Only three books of 
his have reached us, addressed to Autolycus, a learned — 


and studious heathen, containing the elements of reli- 
gion. But he was the author of many other works of 
reputation. In the books which have reached us, his 
references to the greater part of the New Testament 
Scriptures are manifest and copious. 

18. Pantenus, master of the celebrated catechetical 
school at Alexandria, about the year 181, was the author 
of Commentaries upon the Scriptures, mentioned by 
Jerome, but nothing from his pen has reached our time 
except a short passage in the Eclogue ascribed to 
Clement of Alexandria, containing a rule for the better 
understanding of the Prophets. 


~ 
ios 

19. St. Clement of Alexandria, who seems to have 
succeeded Pantznus as master of the catechetical 
school at Alexandria, in A. D. 190, was an author of 
many celebrated works, of which several are preserved 
to our own day, viz. an Exhortation to the Gentiles: 
the Pedagogue or Instructer, in three books: the Stro- 
mata, or various discourses in eight books: and asmall 
treatise entiled, ‘ Who is the Rich Man that may be 
saved.’ His testimony to the four Gospels, and nearly 
all the other books of the New Testament, is clear 
and copious. | 

20. Polycrates, was bishop of the Church in Ephe- 
sus, and flourished in the time of the Emperor Severus 
who began his reign A. D.193. His answer to Victor, 
the bishop of Rome, upon the subject of the dispute 
that arose about the time of keeping Easter, is pre- 
served in Eusebius, where he says that he was the 
eighth of his family who had been bishops, that he 
was sixty-five years old, had conversed with brethren 
in many parts of the world, and had read all the Holy 
Scriptures so as to be confident that his opinion as to 
the time of the festival agreed with the old and pre- 
vailing practice. : 

All these witnesses, besides many others, mentioned 
by Eusebius and Jerome, viz. Heraclitus, Maximus, 
Candidus, Appion, Sextus, and Arabianus, belong to 
the very next age after the Apostles. Most of them 
were men of talents and learning, converted from hea- 
thenism to the faith of Christ, who, after their conver- 
sion, engaged publicly and at all hazards in the defence 
of the Gospel. And this fact, as Dr. Chalmers well ob- 
serves, adds value to their testimony, because they are 
not only witnesses of the existence of Christianity , 


“i 154 
of the canon of the New Testament, and of the ex- 
tension of the Church, but their sincerity and consist- 
ency are demonstrated by their devotion to the cause, 
at the cost of their own comfort and the risk of perse- 
cution, even unto death. 

21. Serapion, the eighth bishop of Antioch, governed 
that primitive see, from A. D. 190, to 211. He wrote 
many pieces, now lost, of some of which however, 
Eusebius speaks particularly. .But what seems espe- 
cially worthy of note in Serapion, is that he condemned 
the apocryphal Gospel of Peter, which is supposed to 


have been a composition of Leucius the heretic, a 
r 


famous forger of apocryphal pieces. 

92. We next turn to Tertullian, the most ancient 
Latin father now remaining, who flourished from the 
year 192, to 216, was a presbyter of Carthage, the son 
of a proconsular tribune, and probably a convert from 
heathenism. His works have come down to usin good 
preservation, and in the highest esteem. And they clear- 
ly demonstrate the integrity of the four Gospels, and 
defend them against the attempts of the heretic Mar- 
cion to mutilate them—besides which he quotes large- 
ly from the Acts of the Apostles, all of St. Paul’s epis- 
tles, one of St. John’s, one of St. Peter, St. Jude, and 
the Revelation. He also furnishes evidence, that in 
his time there was a translation of them in common 
use, when, explaining a passage in | Cor. he says, ‘ it 
is not so in the authentic Greek, as we have it in the 
copies vulgarly used.’? And he plainly testifies that 
the Scriptures were in his day public writings, easily 
accessible abd well known. In his apology addressed 
to the Roman Presidents or to the magistrates of Car- 
thage, he says, ‘whosoever of you, therefore, think 


( 


he 
1 


*, 

155 Poe ” 
that we have no concern for the safety of the Empe-. 
rors, look into the words of God, our Scriptures, which 
we ourselves do not conceal, and which many accidents 
bring into the way of those who are not of our reli- 
gion.’' One passage more we cannot refrain from 
quoting, because it shows the respect pale to the Apos- 
tolic Churches. ‘If? says Tertullian, ‘you be wil- 
ling to exercise your curiosity aeaAtahle in the busi- 
ness of your salvation, visit the Apostolical Churches, 
in which the very east of the Apostles still preside, 
in which their very authentic letters are recited, 


sounding forth the voice and representing the ppt ae 


_rnance of each one of them. Is Achaia near you? 


You have Corinth. If you are not far from Macedo- 
nia, you have Philippi—you have Thessalonica. If 
you can go to Asia, you have Ephesus. But if you 
are near to Italy, you have Rome, from whence we 
also may be easily satisfied.’ 

Passing by several other Christian writers of the 
second century, viz. Aristides, Agrippa Castor, Aristo 
of Peila, Soter, bishop of Rome, Pinytus, bishop of 


1 Qui ergo putaveris nihil ncs de salute Ceesarum curare, inspice 
Dei voces, literas nostras, quas neque ipsi supprimimus, et plerique 
casus ad extraneos transferunt.—4pol. cap. 31. p.30. D.  * 


2 Age jam, qui voles curiositatem melius exercere in negotto. 
salutis tue, percurre ecclesias apostolicas, apud quas ipsa adhue 
cathedree apostolorum suis locis president; apud quas ipsee au- 
thenticz literee eorum recitantur, sonantes vocem, et representan- 
tes faciem, unius cujusque. Proxima est tibi Achaia ? habes Co- 
rinthum. Sion longe es a Macedonia, habes Philippos, habes 
Thessalonicenses. Si potes Asiam tendere, habes Ephesum. Si 
autem Italize adjaces, habes Romam, unde nobis quoque auctoritas 
presto est.—De Prescrip. cap. 36. p. 245. B. 


156 


Gnossus in Crete, Philip, bishop of Gortyna, Palmas, 
bishop of Pontus, Modestus, Musanus, Claudius Apol- 
linaris, bishop of Hierapolis, Bardesanes, Apollonius — 
the martyr, Rhodon, Victor, bishop of Rome, Bachy- 
lus, bishop of Corinth, Theophilus, bishop of Cesarea, ’ 
Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, and Symmachus,— 
and also omitting any particular notice of those Apoc- 
ryphal books, such as the travels of Paul and Theela, 
the Sybilline Oracles, the Clementine Recognitions, 
and the Testaments of the twelve Patriarchs, which had 
a partial circulation during the second century, but 
were never received as of Canonical authority,—we 
proceed to 


§ 2. The writers of the third century. i | 


23. Minucius Felix, who flourished about A. D. 210, 
was the author of an excellent defence of the Christian 
religion, in the form of a dialogue between Ceecilius 


Natalis, a heathen, and Octavius Januarius a Christian, 


in which Minucius is supposed to sit as judge. 

94. Apollonius, who wrote, about A. D. 211, an ex- 
cellent work against the Montanists, of which, how- 
ever, only some portions are extant. 

95, Caius, the author of a book against Proculus, a 
leader of the Cataphrygians, of which, together with 
two other works ascribed to him, there are some frag- 


ments remaining. 


= 


96. St. Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem, flourished 
in A. D. 212, and was a martyr at Cesarea, in the 
seventh persecution, under Decius. He established a 
library at Jerusalem. f : 

27, Hippolytus, bishop of Portus in Italy, as is 
supposed, was the author of several religious works, 


157 


mt 
and a martyr. He flourished A. D. 220, and a monu- 
ment of marble was dug up near Rome, in 1551, which 
is generally supposed to belong to him. It is doubt- 
ful whether any of his genuine works have reached us, 
except the fragments preserved by Theodoret ; but in 
these, his recognition of nearly all the books of the 
New Testament, including the Revelation, and his 
reverence for them, ealling them the * Sacred Foun- 
tain’ and the ‘Sacred Scriptures,’ is very manifest. 

_ 28. Ammonius, the author of a ‘Harmony of the — 
Gospels,’ may be placed next, having flourished about 
the ‘same’ period. 

29. Julius Africanus, placed usually about A. D. 
220, was the author of several religious works of 
reputation, especially of a book of Chronology, begin- 
ing at the Mosaic history, coming down to the death 
of Christ, and thence to the Roman Emperor Macrinus. 

30. Origen was born in Egypt, A. D. 184 or 185, 
and/died. A. D. 253. About! A. D. 202, he was ap- - 
pointed Master of the catechetical school at Alexan- 
dria when not more than eighteen years old. His 
learning, his genius, his virtue, his self-denial, and 
his astonishing labors, form a truly wonderful combi- 
nation. But what we are chiefly concerned to know 
at present, is the testimony which this gifted teacher 


of Christianity bears to the Canon of Seripture ; for 


although the great body of his works, which were im- 
mensely voluminous, amounting to some thousands, are 
lost, yet we still have, in the original Greek, Origen’s 
Treatise on Prayer, his Exhortation to Martyrdom, , 


his Apology for the Christian Religion, in eight books 


against Celsus the Epicurean, his Epistle to Africanus, 


another to Gregory Thaumaturgus, and fragments of 
- 


158 


* 


some other epistles, a part of his Commentaries upon 
divers books of the Old and New Testaments, and 
Philocalia, or extracts from his works made by Greg- 
ory Nazianzen, and Basil the great. From these we 
learn that Origen admitted the whole Canon of the 
New Testament Scriptures, as we have it at this day ; 
although his opinion of the Epistle of James, the 


second Epistle of Peter, the second and third of John, 


and the Epistle of Jude, is not clear. One or two 
quotations from so celebrated a man, may be desirable 
on this subject. | 
In his thirteenth Homily upon Genesis, he says 
‘ Thus Isaac digged again the wells of water which the 
servants of his father had digged. One servant of his 
father was Moses, who dug the well of the law, other 
servants of his father were David and Solomon, and 
the Prophets, and all they who wrote the books of 
the Old Testamert..* * *)* * * Isaac, therefore; 
again digged new wells, yea, the servants of Isaac 
digzed. The servants of Isaac are Matthew, Mark, 
Luke, and John; his servants also are Peter, James, 


and Jude, as likewise the Apostle Paul; who all dig 


the wells of the New Testament.’”? 
In his seventh Homily upon the book of Joshua, 
1 Hoe ergo modo fodit puteos Isaac, quos foderant pueri patris 
sui. Puer patris sui erat Moyses, qui foderat puteum legis. Pueri 


patris sui erant David et Salomon, et prophetee, et si qui alii sunt, qui _ 


libros scripserunt Veteris Testamenti. * * * * Fodit ergo Isaae 
et novos puteos, imo pueri Isaac fodiunt. Pueri sunt Isaac, Mat- 
theeus, Marcus, Lucas, et Joannes; pueri ejus sunt Petrus, Jacobus, e. 
Judas ; puer ejus est et Apostolus Paulus ; qui omnes Novi Testa- 
menti puteos fodiunt.— Orig. Hom. im Gen. zit. p. 95. A. Tom. I. 


ed. Bened. 


age 


159. 


Origen speaks more fully to the same purpose, under 
another figure. ‘ But when,’ says he, ‘our Lord Jesus 
Christ came, of whom Joshua the son of Nun was 
but a type, he sent forth the priests, his Apostles, 
bearing well-beaten trumpets, sounding the glorious 
heavenly doctrine. Matthew sounds first with his 
priestly trumpet, in his Gospel; Mark also, and Luke, 
and John, sounded with their priestly trumpets. Peter 
likewise eines aloud with the two trumpets of his 
epistles; James also, and Jude. And John sounds 
again with his trumpet in his epistles, and the Reve- 


lation ; and Luke also once more, relating the actions 


of the Apostles. Last of all comes he who said, (1 
Cor. 4,9.) ‘For I think that God has set forth us the 
Apostles last ;? and sounding with the trumpets of his 
fourteen Epistles, he threw down to the foundations 
the walls of Jericho, and all the engines of idolatry, 
and all the schemes of the philosophers.’ Many 
other pasages might be added from Origen, in favor 
of the Sacred Scriptures, but our limits forbid. 


1 Veniens ergo Dominus noster Jesus Christus, cujus ille prior 
filius Nave designabat adventum, mnittit sacerdotes apostolos suog 
portantes tubas. duetiles, preedicationis magoificam ceelestemque 
doctrinam. Sacerdotali tuba prima in evangelio suo Matthaeus 
increpuit. Marcus quoque, Lucas et Joannes, suis singulis tubis 
sacerdotalibus cecincrunt. Petrus etiam duabus epistolarum suarum 
personat tubis; Jacobus quoque et Judas, Addit nibilominus 
adhuc et Joannes tuba canere per epistolas suas, et Apocalypsim ; 
et Lucas, apostolorum gesta describens. Novissime autem ille 
veniens, qui dixit, ‘Puto autem nos Deus novissimos apcs‘olos 
ostendit;’ et in quatuordecim epistolarum suarum fulminans tubis, 
muros Jericho, et omnes idololatrize maehinas, et philosophorum 
dogmata, usque ad fundamenta dejecit—Orig. Hom. in lib. Jes. 
vu. 1b. p. 412. AB. R 


o 


160 


31. St. Gregory, bishop of Neocesarea in Pontus, 
was one of Origen’s most celebrated scholars. He 
was ordained in a year 240 and died A. D. 265, hav- 
ing obtained the surname of Thaumaturgus or the 
Wonder-Worker, from many miracles said to be per- 
formed by him. It is unquestionable that he was a 
man of eminent sanctity and learning, and wonderfully 
successful i in his ministry. Some of his works have 
reached our time which are usually admitted to be of 
very uncommon excellence. His sentiments on the 
canon of Scripture, appear to be the same as Origen’s. 

32. Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, was consecrated 
A. D. 247 and died A. D. 264 or 5 , being the thirteenth 
bishop i in the succession of that Diocese. He wasalsoa 
very eminent man for talents and learning ; and adopt- 
ed the same Canon of Scripture as Gregory, save only 
that he doubted whether John the author of the Reve- 
lation, was John the Apostle of our Lord. 

33. St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, was converted 
from heathenism, and baptized in A. D. 244, ordained 
presbyter A. D. 247, and consecrated aibp in A. D. 
248 or 9, having been previously a remarkably eminent 
professor of rhetoric. *He had a good estate, which, 
soon after his converston, he sold, and gave to the 
poor. He was distinguished for sine acts of gene- 
rous benevolence, and was a martyr under the Emperor 
Valerian on the 14th of Sept. A. D. 258. His works, 
consisting of tracts and epistles, have come down to 
us in ae preservation. And in them he bears the 
most full and decided testimony to all the books of the 
New Testament except only the epistle to the He- 

brews, the episile to Philemon, the epistle of James, 
the 2nd epistle of Peter, and the epistle of Jude. — 


i61 


34. Novatus, was the founder of the sect of the 


“Novatians, and flourished A. D. 251. A very few only 


ef his works have come down to us, but there is no 


doubt that he received the Scriptures of the New 


Testament as they were held by other writers general- 
ly ; his schism resting chiefly upon a point of discipline. 

It would be tedious, however, to prolong this list 
by dwelling on each particular name. ‘Suffice it to 
say that Commodian, A. D. 270, Malchion, a pres- 
byter of Antioch, A. D. 270, Anatolius, bishop of 
Laodicea about the same time, Theognostus, A. D. 282, 
Thomas, bishop of Alexandria, A. D. 282, Victorinus, 


bishop of Pettaw, A. D. 290, Methodius, bishop of 


Olympas, A. D. 290, Lucian, a presbyter of Antioch 


-and martyr, who flourished A. D. 290, Pamphilus, a 
presbyter and martyr, A. D. 294, Phileas, bishop of 


Thmuis in Egypt, A. D. 296, jeilcueree a martyr, 


Peter, bishop of Alexandria, pen eyes a bishop of 


Mesopotamia, A. D. 280, erie A. D. 297, not to 
mention Laetantius, res some piace in A. D. 303. 6,- 
all these are cited as bearing witness, directly or 
indirectly, to the same points, viz. the authority, the 
number, and the sacred character of the books of the 
New iesianent We have set down the foregoing dist 


‘in order to shew how abundant is the testimony on 


this subject, from the Apostles’ days to the close of 
the third century, and how totally absurd is the favorite 
allegation of the infidel that the books of the New 
Testament were not known as authoritative until the 
council of Nice, A. D. 326, and that then they were 
settled by vote! For itis plain from what has been 


shewn, that but a very small part of those books were 
ever doubted by Christians at large. The four Gospels, 


14* 


162 


the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen epistles of St. Paul, 
the first of Peter, the first of John, were never subject 
to any question. The rest were admitted by far the 
greater number, nor indeed is any point of faith or 
practice Hepeudin upon the controversy. 


The mode in which the Canon was formed, was not. 


by the authority of councils, but the books of which 
it consists were known to be the genuine writings of 

the Apostles and Evangelists, by tradition. And this 
~ generally concurring or universal tradition is the true 
ground, not to say the only one, by which any ancient 
work is recognized amongst mankind. It is, indeed, 
often said that the council of Laodicea settled the 
Canon of the New Testament. But long before, there 
had been a general agreement of Christians what books 
were canonical and what not, and the decree of the 
council recognizes this agreement, and is based upon 
it. The decree, however, is important, as being 
evidence of the fact, and further evidence of the care 
taken not to suffer any other writings to be read in 
Churches but those of divine authority. 

The time of holding this council is not certain; it 
is, however, generally agreed that it was after the 
eouncil of Nice. Some have considered it as held 
while Silvester was Pope, others, and perhaps: more 
correctly, during the time of Liberius, about the year 
364. We cite the words of the 59th and 60th Canons, 
which refer to the point in bier 


CANON LIX, 


It is not fit that private. or secular psalms be read 
in the Churches, nor any books that are not canonical, 


ORs 


163 


but only the canonical books of the Old and New Tes- 
taments.’ ! 
CANON LX. 


‘These are they which ought to be read from the 
Old Testament. 1. Genesis, 2. Exodus, 3. Leviti- 
cus, 4. Numbers, 5. Deuteronomy, 6. Joshua, 7. Judges, 


Ruth, 8. Esther, 9. Ist and 2ad of Kings, 10. 3d and 


4th of Kings, 11. Ist and 2nd of Chronicles, 12. Ist 
and 2nd of Ezra, 13. Psalms, 150, 14. Proverbs, 


15. Ecelesiastes, 16. the Song of Songs, 17. Job, 


18. twelve minor Prophets, 19. Isaiah, 20. Jeremiah 
and Baruel, the Lamentations and Epistles, 21. Eze- 
kiel, 22. Daniel. And these of the New Testament. 
The four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, 
and John, the Acts of the Apostles, seven Catholie 
Epistles, viz. of James one. of Peter two. of John 
three. of Jude one. the fourteen Epistles of Paul, 
to the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the 


Galatians one, to the Ephesians one, to the Philippians 


one, to the Colossians one, to the Thessalonians two, to 
the Hebrews one, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to 


Philemon one.’?2 


va’. 


‘ 
1" Ot Cov det @vmtxovs wahuovs léyeoPur ey Th Exxhy aia, 
oUdE “axavovicn BiBhia, adhe’ mova ta’ xavovixc TS xawys 
zat mahavecs Ovadnune. 


p. 


0". “Agudwot. &. Aevtsgovomwor. ¢!. Incss Navy. tl. Koutras. 


‘Ped. 7’. (Hodne. 0. Bacwkewy, & B. t. Baothewny, y', 0’. 


wd, Ilagahevvousva, d. 8'. 18’. “Eadous, td 6’. wy’. BéBhos 


2"Ooe det Biblia >avayiwwoxeooor t ¢ mauhavas Ovednunce. 
p Y 7 S BANG, 
4 ? * 7 he i 
Feveouy xoouov. 6’. “Eéodos ?s& Aiyuntov. y'. Agvitixoyr, 
f y 


CHAPTER III. 


§ 1. The testimony borne by some heathen documents, to the 
‘truth of the Gospel facts. 


There are several assertions amongst the early 
Christian apologists, that Pontius Pilate transmitted an 
account of Christ, to the Emperor Tiberius, in conse- 
quence of which Tiberius proposed to the Senate that 
he should be enrolled among the gods. Justin Martyr, 
Tertullian, and afterwards Eusebius, testify on this 
subject. : 

The first apology ef Justin Martyr, presented to 
Antoninus Pius, A. D. 150, after mentioning the cru- 
cifixion of the Saviour, and the attendant circumstances, 
‘proceeds to say, ‘‘and that these things were so done, 


Larwov pv’. 10’ Taporeias Lohowwveos. ie. Bxxrnoacnye. is’. A’ oa 
dopicov. 12’. PS. rm. Addexa wpopgrou. 19’. “Hooung. x. *Tepepuots 
xd Bapsy, Sozjvor xos emigodal. xi. Télexinr. x2". Aavind. Ta os 
eng xouwne diadqunc, route. "Evayyéia re¢cupa, xara MoasSatov, 
xara Mipxov, xara Asxdv, xara “Iwawyy. Upagers acrogdduv. 
"Emizoal xaSodmal saad, ruc. “loxuOs pin, Terps 040, “Towdwe 
TpEiC, {sda pia. “Eaicodos Tovas OsHnredr upEs. m pos Papaiss mia, 
apog Kopiv8lous 00, mpig Tadarag pia, pis “Epedioug pio, mpog 
PidirrnTioug pik, xpos Kodotoaéic wla, pos OstonrowrcZig dvo, 
apis “ESpatoug win, mpeg Tipddsov Oto, wpig “Tisov pun, mpas 
birhrova wia.—Sacr. Concil. Mansi, tom. 2. p. 574. 


165 


you may learn from the acts made in the time of 


Pontius Pilate.’! 
In the apology of Tertullian, about A. D. 200, he 
says, ‘ There was an ancient cies that no one should 


be received for a deity, unless he was first approved 


by ‘the senate. !iberius, in whose time the Christian 
religion had its rise, Haibices received from Palestine 


in Syria an account of such things as manifested our 


Saviour’s divinity, proposed to the senate, that he 
should be placed among the gods. The senate refused, 
because he had himself declined that honor.?¢ 

To the same effect, only somewhat amplified, writes 
Eusebius. In the annals of Tacitus, the celebrated 


heathen historia , published about.A. D. 100, he gives 
an account of the conflagration which aaaen a large 


part of Rome in the tenth year of the reign of Nero, 
with the orders of the emperor for re-building it. The 
historian then proceeds to speak of the persecution of 
the Christians in these words. ‘ But neither all hu- 
man help, nor the liberality of the emperor, nor all 
the atonements presented to the gods, availed to abate 
the infamy he lay under of having ordered the city 
to be set on fire. To suppress, therefore, this common 


rumor, Nero procured others to be accused, and inflict- 


ted exquisite punishment on those people who were 


a 


| Kav tavte ‘ow yeyove, duvacbe made ex tay exo Hovis 
Mihets yevonevwy axtwr.—J, M. ap. 1. p. 76. C. Paris 1636, 

2 Vetus erat decretum, ne qui deus ab Imperatore consecraretur, 
nisi a Senatu probatus.—Tiberius ergo, cujus tempore nomen 
Christianum in seculum intravit, annuntiata sibi ex Syria Pales- 


tina, quae illic veritatem istius divinitatis revelarunt, detulit ad 


Senatum cum praerogativa suffragii sui. Senatus, quia non ipse 


probaverat, respuit—Tertul. ap. cap. 5. p. 6. 


166 


in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly 
known by the name of Christians. They had their 
name from Christus, who in the reign of Tiberius was 
put to death as a criminal, by the procurator Pontius 


Pilate. This pernicious superstition, though checked | 


for a time, broke out agaip, and spread not only over 
Judea, the source of this evil, but reached the city 
also ; whither flow from all quarters, all things vile and 
shameful, and where they find shelter and encourage- 
ment. At first, they only were apprehended who 
confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards a vast 
multitude, discovered by them: all which were con- 
demned, not so much for the crime of burning the 
city, as for theirenmity to mankind. Their executions 
were so contrived as to expose them to derision and 
contempt. Some were covered over with the skins of 
wild beasts, and torn to pieces by dogs; some were 
crucified ; others having been daubed over with com- 
bustible materials, were set up as lights during the 
night-time, and thus burned to death. Nero made use 
of his own gardens as a theatre on this occasion, and 
also exhibited the diversions of the circus, sometimes 
standing in the crowd asa spectator in the habit of 
a charioteer, at others driving a chariot himself: till 
at length these men, though really criminal and de- 
serving exemplary punishment, began to be commiser- 
ated, as people who were destroyed, not out of a 
regard to the public welfare, but only to gratify the 
cruelty of one man.”’! . 


—— 


1 Sed non ope humana, non largitionibus Principis, aut deum 
placamentis. decedebat infamia, quin jussum incendium crederetur. 
{Ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos, et quaesitissimis poenis 


167 


The well known epigram of Martial, who flourished 
during the latter part of the first century, recognizes 
the foregoing cruelty, in the following terms. ‘ You 
have, perhaps, lately seen acted in the theatre, Mu- 
eius, who thrust his hand into the fire. If you think 
such an one patient, valiant, stout, you have the heart 
of an Abderite. For when you are commanded under 
the penalty of the troublesome coat, it is a much great- 
er thing to say I will not, than to burn the hand.” ' 
The troublesome coat, or tunic, here mentioned, 
was made like a sack, of paper or coarse linen cloth, 
and having been first besmeared within and without 


affecit, quos, per flagitia invisos, vulgus Christianos appellabat. 
Auctor nominis ejus Christus, qui, Tiberio imperatte, per procura- 
torem Poritium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat. Repressa in prae- 
sens exitiabilis superstitio rursus erumpebat, non modo per Ju- 
daeam, originem ejus mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta 
undique atrocia ant pudenda confiuunt, celebranturque. {gitur pri- 
mo correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum multitude ingens, 
haud perinde in crimine incendii, quam odio lumani generis, 
convicti sunt. Et pereuntibus addita ludibria, ut ferarum tergis 
contecti, laniatu canum interirent, aut crucibus affixi, aut flaniman- 
di, atque, ubi defecisset dies, in usum nocturni luminis urerentur. 
Hortos suos ei spectaculo Nero obtulerat, et circense ludicrum 
edebat, habitu aurigae permixtus plebi vel curriculo jnsistens, 
Unde, quamquam, adversus sontes, et novissima exempla metitos, 
misera tio oriebatur, tamquam non utilitate publica, sed in saevitiam 
unius absumerentur.—fnn. l. xv. ¢. 44. 


1 In matutina nuper spectatus arena 
Mucius, imposuit qui sua membra focis, 
Si patiens fortisque tibi durusque videtur, 
Abderitanze pectora plebis habes. 
Nam, cum dicatur, tunica presente molesta, 
Ure manum, plus est dicere: non facio. 


Martial. 1 x. Epig. 25. 


168 


with pitch, wax, rosin, sulphur, and other combus- 


tibles, was put upon the condemned Christian, and 


that he might be forced to stand upright, so as to 
resemble a flaming torch, his chin was fastened to a 
stake fixed strongly in the. ground. This horrible de- 
vice was a favorite mode of execution during the per- 
secution of the tyrant Nero. 


The same execrable cruelty is alluded to by Juve-- 


nal, whose satires belong to the same period. ‘Describe 
Tigellinus ‘says he, (a corrupt minister under Nero, ) 
‘and you shall suffer the same punishment with those 
who standing burning in their own flame and smoke, 
their head being held up by a stake fixed to their 
chin, till they make a long stream (of blood and run- 
ning sulphur) on the ROU elas 

But one of the most interesting and iiiiostant of 
the heathen testimonies, is that of Pliny the younger, 
which we shall set forth somewhat more at large. 

Caius Plinius Cecilius Secundus, was born at Como, 
near Milan, A. D. 61 or 62.. He was pretor under: 
the emperor Domitian, and aiterwards prafect of the 
treasury of Saturn, which office seems to have been 
conferred upon Iss both by Nerva and Trajan. He 
was consul in the third year of the reign of Trajan, 
A. D. 100. He was also augur, and for a while gover- 
nor of Pontus and Bithynia. While in this province 
he wrote the famous letter to the Emperor Trajan, 
- about the Christians, which follows at large. 


1 Pone Tigellinum, taeda lucebis in ila, 
- Qua stantes ardent, qui fixo gutture fumant, 
Et latum media suleum deducit arena, 


Juven. Sat. 1. ver. 155. se 


ae — 


a: 


169 


Pliny to the emperor Trajan wisheth health and 
happiness. — | 

It is my custom sire, to refer to you every thing of 
which I doubt. For who can better guide my hesita- 
tion or inform my ignorance? I have never been 
present at the trials of Christians. Therefore I know 
not how far it may be usual to punish or to seek after 
them. Nor have [ hesitated a little, as to the differ- 
ence to be observed on account of their age, whether 
the treatment of the tender should be the same with 
that of the robust ; whether pardon should not be 
granted to repentance, so that he who has once been 
a Christian should be forgiven on ceasing to be so; 
whether the name itself should be punished, although 
there be no crimes committed, or whether only the 
crimes which stand connected with the name. 

Meanwhile I have taken this mode with those who 
were brought as Christians before me. I asked them 
whether they were Christians. Those who confessed 
I asked a second and third time, threatening them 
with punishment. Those who persisted in their ack- 
nowledgment I ordered to be led to punishment. 
For I did not doubt whatever might be their senti- 
ments, that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy desery- 
ed to be punished. There were others of the same 
madness, whom, because they were Roman citizens, 
I set down to be sent to the city. 

By and by, as is customary, the crime spreading 
itself, many sorts of people fell under my observation. 
An anonymous accusation was presented to me, con- 
taining the names of many, who denied that they 
were Christians, or had been; and these repeated 

15 


170 


after me an invocation of the gods, and _ sacrificed 
with wine and incense to your image, which I had 
ordered to be brought with the statues of the gods for 
that purpose; besides which, they reviled Christ. 
None of which things, it is said, can they be com- 
pelled to do who are really Christians. These, there- 
fore, I thought fit to discharge. 

Others named by the informer, said that they were 
Christians, and presently denied it. Some said that 
they had been, but had ceased, some three years ago, 
some longer, and one above twenty years. .They all 
worshipped your image and the statues of the gods. 
And they also reviled Christ. But they affirmed that 
the height of their crime or error was this, that they 
had been accustomed to meet together before it was 
light on a stated day, and to sing alternately a hymn 
to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by an 
oath, not to the commission of any wickedness, but 
that they would not commit theft, nor robbery, nor 


adultery, that they would not falsify their word, nor. 


deny a pledge committed to them, when called upon. 
Which things being done, it had been their custom to 
separate, and then to come together again to take food, 
which they ate promiscuously, but innocently ; but this 
they had desisted from, since my edict, in which, ac- 
cording to your commands, I had forbidden such 
assemblies. 3 | 
From this I thought it the more necessary to ascer- 
tain the truth, by torture, from two maid-servants who 
were called ministers. But I discovered nothing be- 
sides a depraved and excessive superstition. 
Therefore, suspending judicial proceedings, I have 


- Se = “goal 


171 


hastened to consult you. For it seems to me an affair 
worthy of consultation, chiefly on account of the num- 
bers endangered ; because many of every age, and of 
either sex, are brought and will be brought into peril. 
For the contagion of this superstition has infested not 
only the cities, but even the villages and fields. Nev- 
ertheless, it seems to me that it may be arrested and 
corrected. Certainly it sufficiently appears that the 
temples begin to be frequented, which were almost 
desolate, and the sacred solemnities, though long in- 
termitted, are revived. Victims are every where 
bought up, which seldom, until lately, found a pur- 
chaser. From all which it is easy to conceive that a 
multitude of men might be reclaimed, if there was 
granted an opportunity for repentance,”! 


1 C. Plinius Trajano Imp. 8. Lib. x. ep. 97. 

Solenne est mihi, Domine, omnia, de quibus dubito, ad te referre. 
Quis enim potest melius vel cunctationem meam regere, vel 
ignorantiam instruere ? Cognitionibus Christianorum interfui nun- 
quam. Ideo nescio, quid et quatenus aut puniri soleat aut quaeri. 
Nec mediocriter heesitavi, sitne aliquod discrimen etatum, au quam- 
libet teneri nihil a robustioribus differant : deturne peenitentiz venia 5 
an ei,qui omnino Christianus fuit, desiisse non prosit; nomen ipsum, 
etiam si flagitiis careat, an flagitia coherentia nomini puniantur. Ip- 
terim, in iis qui ad me tanquam Christiani deferebantur, hune sum 
secutus modum. Interrogavi ipsos, an essent Christiani: confi- 
tentes iterum ac tertio interrogavi, supplicium minatus: perseve- 
rantes duci jussi. Neque enim dubitabaum, qualecumque esset 
quod faterentur, pervicaciam certe et inflexibilem obstinationem 
debere puniri. Fuerunt alii similis amentiz ; quos, quia cives 
Romani erant, annotavi in Urbem remittendos. Mox, ipso tractu 
(al. tractatu) ut fieri solet, diffundente se crimine, plures species 
inciderunt. Propositus est libellus sine auctore, multorum nomina 
continens, qui negdrunt se esse Christianos, aut fuisse; quum, 
preeunte me, Deos appellarent, et imagini tuee (quam, propter hoc, 


172 


To this letter of Pliny to Trajan, the emperor sent 
the following reply. “ You have taken the proper 
course, my Pliny, in your proceedings with those who 
have been brought before you as Christians. But it 
is not possible to establish any certain form which shall 
hold universally. They ought not to be sought after. 
If they are brought before you and convicted, they 
must be punished. Nevertheless, he who denies that 


jusseram cum simulacris numinum afferri) thure ac vino supplicar- 
ent; preterea maledixerent Christo ; quorum nihil cogi posse 
dicuntur, qui sunt revera Christiani. Ergo dimittendos putavi. Alii,, 
ab indice nominati, esse se Christianos dixerunt: et mox negaverunt ; 
fuisse quidem,sed desiisse ; quidam ante triennium, quidam ante 
plures annos, non nemo etiam ante viginti quoque. Omnes et 
imaginem tuam, Deorumque simulaera, yenerati sunt: ii et Christo 
maledixerunt. Affirmabant autem, hane fuisse summam_ vel 
culpz suae vel erroris, quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem 
convenire, carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere secum invicem ; 
Seque sacramento non in scelus aliquod obstringere, sed ne furta, 
ne latrocinia, ne adulteria committerent, ne fidem fallerent, ne 
depositum appellati abnegarent: quibus peractis, morem sibi dis- 
cedendi fuisse, rursusque coéundiad capiendum cibum, promiscuum 
tamen, et innoxium: quod et ipsum facere desiisse post edictum 
meum, quo, secundum mandata tua, hetaerias esse vetueram. Quo 
magis necessarium credidi, ex duabus ancillis, quae ministrae 
dicebantur, quid esset veri, et per tormenta quaerere. Nihil aliud 
inveni, quam superstitionem pravam et immodicam. Ideoque dilata 
cognitione, ad consulendum te decurri. Visa est enim mihi 
res digna consultatione, maxime propter periclitantium numerum. 
Multi enim omnis aetatis, utriusque sexts etiam, vocantur in 
periculum, et vocabuntur. N eque civitates tantum, sed vicos 
etiam atque agros, superstitionis istius contagio pervagata est. Que 
videtur sisti et corrigi posse. Certe satis constat, prope jam des- 
olata templa ccepisse celebrari, et sacra solennia, diu intermissa, 
repeti; passimque vaenire victimas, quarum adhuc rarissimus emp- 
tor inveniebatur. Ex quo facile est opinari, quae turba hominum 

emendari possit, si sit pcenitentiae locus.’ 


if 


*% 


173 


he is a Christian, and makes it manifest in fact, that 
is, by invoking our gods, although he was suspected in 
time past, let him be pardoned on his repentance. No 
information, however, should be received without a 
name, in the case of any crime, for this would be of 
the worst example, nor would such a procedure agree 
with our age.’? } 

_ The genuineness of these letters is unquestioned. 
They forma part of Pliny’s works, which have reached 
our time in entire preservation. And they are both 
particularly mentioned by Tertullian and Eusebius. 
From this evidence—the evidence of an enemy—a 
heathen philosopher—having the fullest information, 
since he was governor of an extensive province of the 
Roman Empire,—and writing to the emperor, where 
the utmost exactness must be presumed,—we demon- 
strate these facts. First, that at the close of the very 
first century, the Christian religion prevailed above 
the heathen in Pontus and Bithynia, so that it was 
diffused not only in the cities, but throughout the 
villages and fields, and the heathen temples were 
almost desolate. 

Secondly, that Christians were cruelly persecuted 
er EE Oi ale NI i Beyccl 10) in OGRE a a 

1 Trajanus Plinio S. Lib. x, ep. 98. 

‘Actum, quem debuisti, mi Secunde, in executiendis causis 
eorum qui Christiani ad te delati fuerant, secutus es. N eque enim 
in universum aliquid, quod quasi certam formam habeat, constitui 
potest. Conquirendi non sunt; si deferantur et arguantur, 
puniendi sunt ; ita tamen, ut qui negaverit se Christianum esse, 


idque re ipsa manifestum fecerit, id est, supplicando Diis nostris, 
quamvis suspectus in praeteritum fuerit, veniam ex peenitentia 


impetret. Sine auctore vero propositi libelli nullo crimine locum 


habere debent: Nam et pessimi exempli, nec nostri saeculi est,’ 


15* 


174 


even unto death, only for their profession, without any 
other crime than refusing to do sacrifice to the godsof 
the heathen and to revile their Redeemer—and this, “4 
not by such menas Nero, but by the best of the Ramin 
princes and governors, ok the names of Trajan and | 
Pliny are among their brightest ornaments. i 
Thirdly, that no evil could be found in these primi- 
tive disciples, except their unshaken constancy intheir 
religious faith: for although many gave .up their pro- 
fession to save their lives, yet Pliny himself was aware 
that those who were really Christians could not by 
any means be induced to desert their allegiance to the 
Saviour. Stronger and clearer testimony to the exten- 
_sion and character of the Church, cannot be desired, 
/ than is here given, from the pen of a iiamahell 
heathen,—himself a persecuting magistrate of an in- 
tolérant Emperor. And let it be specially marked, 
that he presents the condition of Christianity in A. D. 
106; only eight or nine years at farthest, after the 
death of the Apostle John, and but seventy-two years 
after the crucifixion of the Redeemer ! 

We give these corroborative proofs, rather as a mat- 
ter of supererogation, for the truth of Christianity 
stands firm on its own authority, and needs no heathen 
testimony to its power; and we shall close this dis- 
sertation, already protracted to an unexpected length, 

in the words with which the admirable Prof. Lee con- 

cludes his Prolegomena; ‘‘ Plura equidem dare potui, 
meliora doctior quivis: quod potui preestiti: et ni ne- 
gotiis peené innumeris fuissem distractus, hee qualia- 
cunque antehac sane prestitissem.” 


Je ee ol a 


t<€_ 


ery ag 


ee Fe. 


4 
ut 
rs 


>, 


Si 
= aye? 
oats 


WA 0 


1012 01012 5369 


